Why Did Reform M.P. Attack Cabinet’s Policy?

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18545, 20 August 1928, Page 8

Why Did Reform M.P. Attack Cabinet’s Policy?

SOME ALLEGE THAT MR A. HAMILTON KNOWS WHAT IS IN LICENSING BILL

(Special to the “Star.”) WELLINGTON, August 20. Much depends upon the point of view, of course, but it would be hard to describe the speeches made in the House of Representatives last week on the Financial Debate as illuminating. Few of them have had much relation to the main points of the Budget, and many of them have been a sheer waste of time. The- session has now been in progress for just about two months, and the business is being proceeded with so casually that doubts are entertained as to whether it will be possible to finish up by the first week in October, let alone by the end of September, as had originally been intended. A Reform Outburst. Railways, political and otherwise, have formed the main subject of criticism of the Government's policy and, strange to it was an ardent Reformer, Mr J. A. Hamilton, the member for Awarua, who first spilled the beans on this score. lie complained bitterly and loudly about the East Coast railway in the North Island, aqd said it appeared that the engineers, and not Parliament, controlled the Government in the matter of railways. Needless to say, Mr Hamilton’s outburst was not appreciated in Ministerial quarters, and rumour has been busy as to the reason. Some say that Mr Hamilton knows what is in the Licensing Bill, and that he took this opportunity to show rebellion because of his dislike of the Prime Minister’s proposals. A truer reason may be that some of Mr Hamilton’s constituents from far away Southland were sitting in the galleries, and Mr Hamilton seized on the opportunity of. impressing them. If that was his object it is difficult to see how he could not but have succeeded. When the Prime Minister speaks on the resumption of the debate on Tuesday, if he adheres to his present intention of taking part, Mr Hamilton will learn that a rod has been in pickle for him. Mora Talk, More Pay. The movement for higher salaries for members of Parliament has revived. Mr J. G. Eliott, the member for Oroua, brought up the subject during the week and suggested that the necessary legislation to become operative as from January 1 next should be passed this session. For once in his life Mr Eliott said something that received support from the Labour benches. He is usually regarded as one of the most bitter anti-Labour men in Parliament, and as one who would not hesitate to support drastic alterations to the Arbitration Act not designed exactly to be of benefit to the “ wage slaves.” On the matter of an increase in the wages of eloquence, however (and Mr Eliott is one of the most silent men in the House), he has Mr M’Combs behind him. On this occasion, Mr M’Combs did not produce his calculating machine to show the variations in the cost of living index figure as applying to members of Parliament, but he backed up the idea that legislators’ “ screws ” should be raised this session, so that the electors might have an opportunity of saying at the election whether they approved of the increase or not. Exactly how the electors could express their views on the point is not clear, unless they are given the opportunity £n each electorate to vote for candidates who do not want any more pay; and, as no such political oddities have yet been born, it seems that if the Government accedes to the request the electors will have no alternative ( but to pay up and be glum about it. Money makes the mare go, and an additional supply of it may even raise politicians in the esteem of the people, who apparently are not aware that men—and women, now—go into politics not for honour and limelight, but as a labour of love.

If the Government does bring down a Bill on the point, there would ap-

pear to be quite a good chance of its being rushed with gladness on to the Statute Book, even in the dying hours of the session, and without amendment, too, unless it be in the nature of making the increase higher still. It is interesting to reflect on what the Legislative Council might do with such a Bill if it made no provision for increasing the honoraria of Councillors, but what would be the attitude of those members who desire the abolition of the Legislative Council in the event of the Government proposing more money for the “ Lords ” as well 7 Thanks to the loquacity of the “ Lower House ” this session, the Legislative Council has scarcely sat for a fortnight all told, and it is hard to see that the

“ Lords ” have earned their present honoraria, let alone getting any more. However, the House will probably get down to business in the dying hours of the session, and the Legislative Councillors will be able to. work ot-ertimo without let or hindrance.

Wireless Speeches. The Prime Minister confessed during: the week to a dislike to going before the microphone for broadcasting purposes. He modestly put this down to his nervous temperament. Few would characterise Mr Coates as a nervous man. but it is a fact that it took a good deal, when broadcasting became so popular in New Zealand, to induce him to speak over the air. He has possibly felt that people sitting by their firesides would regard what he was saying as so much hot air, and probably there are times when the Prime Minister entertains fears which are not groundless. It depends upon the point ot view. As to wnether the broadcasting of political speeches and propaganda should be permitted is a matter for argument. Were the subject matter similar in nature to that mostly heard in the House last week it is to be feared that wireless would have lost much, of its claim to be a means of entertainment and education. There is one thing clear, however, and that is if arrangements could be made to have the proceedings In Parliament broadcast on relay for one evening or so a week, the electors would soon get a correct impression as to the validity or otherwise of the movement for Increases In honoraria. Perhaps if the speeches were broadcast on the wireless “ silent night,** the more-salary agitation would have a better chance of success outside the House. Let Him Down. Mr Sullivan committed an apparent indiscretion in regard to his Labour confrere from Eden, Mr H. G. R. Mason, on Thursday night. Mr Mason is the unfortunate possessor of a most dreary and monotonous nasal voice, and when he rises to speak the nerves are in for a bad time. Just as Mr Mason finished speaking late on Thursday night, up jumped Mr Sullivan to draw Mr Speakers attention to the apparent lack of a quorum (twenty members). As it happened, there were twenty«one members in the Chamber at the moment, but it was no compliment to Mr Mason for Mr Sullivan to have rafsed the point as it was a tacit admission that the only effect of Mr Mason’s speech was to practically empty the House. Anyhow, it did, but Mr Sullivan would have shown better “ comradeship ** by not drawing attention to the fact.

Well, the financial debate is now about to run into its third week, and that is a fact which will make the whole of the week-end somewhat doleful. To contemplate even another hour of the dreariness which has enshrouded the debate last week is more than enough to induce a nervous breakdown, so that the next best thing to do is to try to forget about it.