RAILWAY PRIVILEGES.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 11756, 21 July 1916, Page 3

RAILWAY PRIVILEGES.

WEALTHY MAN'S CHEAP TRAVELLING. STRONG COMMENT IN PARLIAMENT. [From Our Correspondent.j WELLINGTON, July 20. It may not be generally known that sons and daughters of members of the legislature, no matter how old, are able to travel on tho railways at reduced rates. The matter was brought out by a question to the Hou W. H. Homes, from Mr Isitt, who asked if it were true that a railway ticket at reduced fare,from Napier to Wellington, was recently issued to a married gentleman of about fifty years of age on the ground that ho was the son of a member of tho legislature. Tho Minister, in replying to-day, said: A railway ticket at reduced rate was issued to the son of a member of the legislature on July 11. This is in accordance with the regulations of the Railway Department, and tho arrangements have been in operation for many years. There is no age restriction so far as the concession to sous and daughters of members of tho legislature are concerned. In tho case in question, the gentleman presented' the usual certificate, signed by his father, and was given the concession to which he was entitled, Mr Hindmarsh, commenting on the answer, took strong exception to aeoncession ticket being issued to such a man, especially at this time. MrWdford: Who is it? Mr Hindmai'sh: Young Ormond. Ho added that tho incident was a scandalous abuse of a privilege given to' members of Parliament, and it was his duty to call public attention, especially as the member of the Legislative Council concerned was Mr Ormond, ouo of tho wealthiest men in the country. He hoped, if there was any patriotism amongst the peoplo of New. Zealand, particularly . tho sheep-farmers of Hawke's Bay, tho man would be boycotted and made to feel his position. He could not imagine a wonso bit of bad taste for one of the wealthiest men in the Dominion, whom years ago he had heard held up as a statesman, though the speaker knew that was_ a lie, because he had no statesmanlike qualities about him. Mr Speaker called attention to the rule that members of the Upper House could not be referred to like this. Mr Hindmarsh retorted that he had pleasuro in putting on record tho name of the man who did such a mean, shabby act. Mr Speaker ordered Mr Hindmarsh to resume his.seat. Mr Brown,« later, said that he wished to refer to the question. Ho had not heard Air Hindmarsh's speech. He did not know another member, except Mr Isitt, who would ask such a question. He liked to be a sport. That man was entitled to his ticket. The member asking' the question would be sorry he asked it. Mr Isitt said he hesitated some time before asking the' question, but he thought that it was an abuse of privilege, a very grave departure from the spirit of the concession, for any married man in an independent position to get a concession to attend races or do business in the city. He felt sure that the Minister of Railways and the majority of members agreed with him that the concession ought to be limited. The Hon W, H. Hemes, Minister of Railways, said' he would not like it to go ak>ui that anything-extraordinary iv?-4 *c«3F» done by the Railway Department. 'X'ho ordinary privileges were open to Mr Ormond, and all the requiroi3e;?ts had been carried out in the case. Re- cufc-e agreed that tlio concession was mi intended for such cases as that alluded to in the question. It was difficult to draw the "line, and difficult to put down conditions which wore not open to some abuse. He did not think that Mr Ormond should have asked for a concession for his son, but a clause to prevent that might well prevent a genuine application that ought to be granted. He must, therefore, leave it to the good taste of members. He thought, however, that Mr Isitt would have done better to have gone to him privately, without giving so much publicity to the matter.