PARLIAMENT HAS PROLONGED FIGHT.

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 72, 25 March 1931, Page 5

PARLIAMENT HAS PROLONGED FIGHT.

MANY COMPLAINTS BY THE LABOUR MEMBERS. Per Press Associati<Jn. WELLINGTON, March 24. The House resumed at 2.30, when the debate in committee on the short title of the Finance Bill was continued by Labour speakers. Mr W. Nash (Hutt), deplored the reduction of grants to hospital boards, education boards and university colleges, insisting that these items should not suffer under any circumstances. The Unemployment Board could not carry its load unless it received further help from the Government, and thus further responsibility would fall on the social services applied by hospital boards. Mr Barnard (Napier) asked for consideration of the plight of workers in the Hawke’s Bay district who had suffered through the earthquake. Mr Campbell (Reform, Hawke’s Bay) broke the continuity of Labour speakers to ask the Prime Minister to delay the effect of the Bill so far as it concerned people in the earthquake area from Wairoa to Waipawa. Their homes had been damaged and they w£re hard put to it. The difficulty would only apply to married men with homes and the number would not be very great. He suggested that they should be exempted from the reductions for, say, twelve months. The Prime Minister: I will be pleaded to go into it. Mr H. E. Holland: The Prime Minister has spoken at last. Hospital Board Employees. Mr W. Nash again referred to the question of grants to hospital boards, whereupon Mr Forbes replied that the reduction applied only to salaries of hospital board employees, which would be reduced 10 per cent. It had nothing whatever to do with the functions of hospital boards. As Mr Forbes sat down there was a burst of ironical applause from the Labour benches. Mr IT. E. Holland, leader of the Labour Party, took strong exception to the proposal to reduce the remuneration of nurses and hospital attendants, adding that if the Government lived up to its promises it would be moving in the direction of increasing these salarOther Labour members supported Mr Holland’s complaint, and also deprecated the proposal to reduce salaries in the school teaching profession. About 3.45 p.m. Mr Jordon (Manu. kau) drew attention to the state of the House and the bells were set ring, ing to summon a quorum. Shortly alterwards Mr Armstrong (Christchurch East) again raised the question whether there was a quorum or not, but while he was speaking a couple of members entered the House and a count of heads proved that the necessary number were present. Mr Savage (Auckland West) appealed to Mr Forbes to say whether he would consider inserting a clause limiting the operation of reduced salaries to a specified period, remarking, “Some of us have a notion why prices of primary products went down so far, and w r e are not prepared to admit they always will be down. For that reason we desire some provision to be inserted in the Bill to indicate that the reductions will not be permanent.” He considered the country was entitled to such a stipulation, otherwise there ■would be injustice done to the working community, to say nothing of the injustice of the measure as a whole.

Fresh Labour speakers joined in the attack on the Bill about five o’clock,

replacing their colleagues whose privileges to speak on the short title had been exhausted. Debate Continues. Mr Chapman (Labour, Wellington North) proceeded to carry on the debate, discussing the clause relating to hospital board subsidies, declaring that there was nothing in it limiting reduction to salaries. The Government appeared to be in despair. It should not be permitted to carry on, but others would step into the breach. Mr Fletcher (Independent, Grey Lynn) asked the Government to reconsider its attitude towards the poorer paid men. It should raise additional revenue from liquor. Mr Semple (Labour, Wellington South) said that Labour members were prepared to exhaust the privileges of the House, and themselves, too, in registering a protest against the measure. Mr Harris (Waitemata), speaking from the Reform benches, said the Prime Minister had ignored the reasonable suggestions of the Opposition leader, and intended to force the Bill through without amendment, without heeding those who wished to afford the Government assistance. Addressing Mr Forbes, he declared, “ I don’t know where the hon gentleman stands on his own Bill. I want an explanation before I can vote on this Bill.” Hardship Commission. Replying to Mr Harris, the Prim* Minister said he did not wish anyone to cast his vote without having a clear . understanding of w’hat he was voting for. Mr Coates had asked the speaker not to give an answer, and he had mere-* ly complied with that request in not replying directly. However, he wai prepared to give a reply as to the suggestion for a graduated cut. He repeated his previous statement that that course had been tried, but it would not give the revenue that was absolutely necessary. He was confident that if a 10 per cent reduction in wages was made there would be a corresponding reduction in the cost of living. The intention, he announced, was to introduce a hardship commission into the public service. So far as the general principle of the Bill was concerned he would rather be defeated a dozen times than go back on the policy he had already placed before the country, and which, he believed, was the right one to ensure that the country’s finances w r ere put on a proper basis. The only way to restore the position was _ to make the reductions general right through the country, from top to bottom, and he was sure that the real wages of the people, when the cost of living w'as reduced proportionately, would not be affected in the slightest.

Mr Lysnar (Independent, Gisborne) characterised the suggestions of the leader of the Opposition as mere political eyewash. lie had to admit it meant being £200,000 short and could not* say ‘where this would come from except from reduction in the cost of living. Reformers Take Part. Speaking at 11.45, Mr Burnett (Reform, Temuka) congratulated the Prime Minister on his decision to appoint a hardship tribunal in the public service, and expressed the hope that it would be the nucleus of a permanent body to deal with salary questions. Mr Burnett said he was sure a great dual of camaraderie existed between Mr Forbes and himself, as both were off the tussock slopes of Canterbury. He was anxious to make equality of scarifice a real thing, and not so much mouthing. The W’hole country was looking to Parliament this week to do something towards effecting a readjustment which would do more than anything else to place New Zealand on the high road to prosperity again. Other Reformers participated in the debate, urging the Government seriously to consider Mr Coates’s plea for exemption from the cut for the lower paid married men.