DEFECTIVES BILL PASSED BY HOUSE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18576, 26 September 1928, Page 10

DEFECTIVES BILL PASSED BY HOUSE.

STERILISATION CLAUSE WITHDRAWN TO-DAY. (Continued from Page 1.) Per Press Association. WELLINGTON. September 26. When the Committee resumed at 9 o’clock Mr Sullivan asked what provision was made for assisting poor parents to appeal against the registration of their children under Clause 17. The Minister, in reply, said that it would be his duty to frame regulations governing these proceedings. It was his idea that such cases should be heard by a judge in chambers. Counsel would not be encouraged to go there as advocates, because it would be entirely a matter of arriving at the facts. It was his intention that parents would not have to bear any part of the expense of such appeals. The clause was passed. The Minister announced that he proposed to withdraw Clause 21, prohibiting the marriage of persons registered under the foregoing provisions of the Act, and this was agreed to, preliminary to the withdrawal of Clause 25 deal ing with sterilisation. Clause 25 was subsequently withdrawn. Discussing the final clause the Minister said that the- class of society which the Government proposed to recognise was that known as the “After Care” Society, but nothing definite was decided yet. The societies selected would be high class social service societies.

Several members urged the exclusion of the “ busybody ** from interference with those who come under the Act.

Mr Lysnar moved a new clause to facilitate the discharge of patients from mental hospitals, which the Minister would not accept, and this completed the committee stage. Tactics Criticised. The Speaker resumed the chair at 10.50 when Mr Parry moved to re-com-mit the Bill with a view’ to compiling separate registers for children and adults. The Minister said that this was impracticable as in many cases mental defectives were still children after they were grown up.

The proposal was lost on the voices. On the third reading Mr Holland said that the long debate was due entirely to the refusal of the Minister to indicate what clauses he was prepared to compromise upon. The Bill was now vastly improved, and this improvement was due entirely to the attitude of the Opposition. There still, however, remained Clause 7, to which the Labour Party strenuously objected, and with a view of giving the House a further opportunity to consider that clause he moved to re-commit the Bill. This was seconded by Sir Joseph Ward, who adversely commented upon the methods employed to force the Bill through the House. On a division being taken on Mr Holland’s amendment to recommit the Bill it was defeated by 38 to 15, and the Bill was read a third time and passed, after the Prime Minister had intimated that the clauses which had been withdrawn would be reconsidered when they were better understood by the country. GOVERNMENT HAD STEADY MAJORITY. (Special to the “Star.”) WELLINGTON, September 26. An all-night stonewall followed the Prime Minister’s declaration that the Mental Defectives Bill substantially should go through. Proceedings were unexciting, the usual motions to report progress being defeated by a steady Government total of about thirty opposed to the minority of ten, the remaining members being away resting with the object of relieving the all-night stonewallers. The committee adjourned at 7 a.m. for breakfast when Clause 15 was under discussion. Fair progress was made on resumption and the promise of early relief came on reaching Clause 21. This proposes to prohibit the marriage of piersons on the register as mentally defective. The Minister of Health announced that he intended to drop the sterilisation clause, so it logically followed that he would delete Clause 21, which was thereupon withdrawn. The final clause of the Bill was reached at 10 o’clock. It authorised the Minister to recognise social service organisations in connection with the work under the Act and it was explained by the Hon J. A. Young that the typq of society in his mind was that which would take a friendly and sympathetic interest in patients who were on parole. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East); Not the keyhole societies? The Minister replied in the negative. He added that the right type of organisation would be discovered as they went along.