PARLIAMENT AT WORK

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 150, 27 June 1931, Page 8

PARLIAMENT AT WORK

RELIEF OF UNEMPLOYMENT BILL PUT THROUGH ALL STAGES AND PASSED DEBATE CONTINUING ON IMPREST SUPPLY • The Imprest Supply Bill and Local Authorities Empowering (Belief of Unemployment) Extension Bill, were the two measures which engaged greatest consideration by the House of Representatives yesterday. Both were accorded urgency, and the latter Bill was put through all stages and passed during the afternoon. The debate on the Imprest Supply Bill was continued beyond midnight.

PROPOSED LEGISLATION PIONEER CURRENCY BILL. PRICE LEVELS CONSTANT. [ Per Press Association.] WELLINGTON", June 26. The House of Representatives met it 2.30 p.m. Notice was given of intention to introduce the Distress and Relief Amendment Bill (Mr Fraser). Hon. W. B. Taverner was granted seven days’ leave of absence on account of illness. The following Bills were introduced and read a first time:—Currency (Mr Mason): Electoral Amendment (Mr Clinkard); Divorce and Matrimonial Causes (Mr Mason); Gaming Amendment (Mr Armstrong); Rotorua Borough Reclamation Empowering (Mr | Clinkard); Local Elections and Polls Amendment (Mr Mason); Deaths by Accident Compensation Amendment (Mr Mason); Crimes Amendment (Mr Mason); Shipping and Seamen Amend- [ ment (Mr Mason). Explaining the Currency Bill. Mr Mason said it was proposed that the currency should be ut|Vr the control of the people independent of both the Government of the day and the private banks. The amount of curi rcncy in circulation should be so regu ! latcd that price levels would be constant. There should be a solid basis ' for confidence, so that the business of the country could be conducted on an even keel. There would be no periods I of depression or inflation. The currency problem was facing most countries of the world and it might be said that it was not for New Zealand to take a lead in endeavouring to adjust the situation. New Zealand, however, had always been actuated by the. pioneering spirit, and he was confident that it was well suited to take the initiative in a matter of this kind. There would never be progress if each nation waited for some other to take the lead. Introducing the Electoral Amendment Bill. Mr Clinkard said he was satisfied that there should be an absolute majority system in connection with general elections. His Bill provided for preferential voting with the elimination of the bottom candidates at each recount. Accorded Urgency. The Imprest Supply Bill and Local Authorities Empowering (Relief of Unemployment) Extension Bill were introduced by Governor-General’s message and were accorded urgency. The Prime Minister explained that the Bill extended the period within which local bodies might raise loans without a poll for the purpose of relieving unemployment to July 31 of next year. They would still have to obtain the consent of the Local Government Loans Board before raising the loans. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Labour. Avon) referred to the good work done by many local bodies which had taken advantage of the legislation, and expressed the hope that no difficulties would bo raised by the local Government Loans Board to prevent works being put in hand. Mr A. Harris (Reform, Waitemata), said he believed the operation of the Act was largely restricted or nullified by the board. Many local bodies had experienced decided opposition from the board, and the Government should look into the matter. It seemed strange that the board should raise obstacles when the local bodies were prepared to rate themselves in order to assist the Government. Mr Forbes said he did not dispute that unemployment was a national obligation, but under the Number 5 Scheme local bodies had received the benefit, and they could tot divest themselves altogether of the responsibility. He thought the composition of tha i Local Government Loans Board was sufficient to inspire confidence in it. The board was working in the best interests of the country as a whole. Mr R. A. Wright (Reform, Wellington Suburbs) said that at present re strictions were placed on local bodies as to the work which the unemployed could do, and it seemed to him that the time had come when local bodies should be given a greater measure of freedom. Mr Forbes said the amount >f money raised under the Act was £102.533 in 1928-29, £102.400 in 1929-30, and £110,150 in 1930-31—total £333,083 That had been subsidised by the Gov- ■ ernment to the extent of £175,102, an I by the Unemployment Board to the] amount of £63,965. Mr F. Langstone (Labour. Wairnarino) suggested that the Govern men', should raise a comprehensive loan for the assistance of local bodies for uncm ploymcnt relief, as local bodies found difficulty in securing money, otherwise possibly nine-tenths of the local bodiewould not be able to take advantage] of the Act. The Leader of the Labour Party, Mi H. E. Holland, supported what had been said by his colleagues. He sai-l that for the Bill to be made successful, the measure depended as much o:i tho Local Government Loans Board as on the local bodies, and many of the latter were wholly unable, with the funds at their disposal, to purchase materials for relief works. Quite a lot of very necessary works could not be undertaken under the conditions of th l ' Number 5 Scheme. Mr W. D. Lysnar (Independent, Gisborne) expressed the hope that the Prime Minister would not be induced to interfere with the Local Government Loans Board, which should be permit ted to exercise full discretion. I The Bill was put through all stages and passed.

i Britain’s War Debt Offer. Speaking on the motion to commit the Imprest Supply Bill, Hon. W. Downie Stewart said he wished to ro for to Britain’s offer to the Dominions in connection with debt payments. The offer meant that Britain was prepared to sacrifice approximately £11,000,009 in order to give the Dominions the benefit of the movement originated by Mr Hoover. When one considered tha t\‘mendous burden under which Brit- ■ 1 ain was labouring, and the efforts which she was making to restore peace and prosperity, it would be apparent 1 that, this offer must have aroused the • keenest admiration of all who were watching the position. While New Zeai land’s difficulties were great, those of ■ Britain were so overwhelming that ir. • was surprising that she was able *o I make this offer. Britain was bearing a debt which some European statesmen considered she could not carry. She • was determined to repay her debts at. : 20 shillings in the pound, while France ■ was quite prepared to repay hers with : the franc at approximately 2d. The amount New Zealand was indebted to Britain when the debt was funded in 1922 was £27,532,164, and it • was on that amount, which now had been reduced by us to approximately £24,000,000 that this concesion was pro- ; posed to be made. Air Stewart remarked that it had been shown that of the debt funded in 1922, £1,991.919 was tor items other than war expenditure. For instance, it included approximately £1,000,000 which was the balance- owing on the warship New Zealand. The Prime Minister had stated, Mr Stewart continued, that he had set out to balance the Budget. The position appeared to be that in making his plans Mr Forbes could have had no knowledge of this possible windfall in the form of an offer from Britain. It was true also, that he would have been counting upon receiving German reparation payments. New Zealand’s payments to Britain in connection with war debts amounted to half-yearly sums of £825,000. It had been pointed out that the first half-yearly instalment already had been paid. Britain’s proposal was to grant a moratorium from July Ito June 30 of next year. If the Prime Minister did not receive from Germany, New Zealand’s share of reparations for the year, he would go short of £270,000 after July. The point he wished the Prime Minister to consider was whether he would be prepared to postpone New Zealand’s payments only to the extent which Germany was not paying us, but so far as the remaining half million was concerned, New Zealand should make the payment as usual. He emphasised the extent of Britain’s difficulties compared with those confronting New Zealand, and added that in addition to this aspect, it must be realised that New Zealand’s credit in London would be enhanced if the course he had suggested were adopted. It had become apparent that our credit had suffered as the result of our association with Australia. “Just as America Las made a gesture to Europe and Britain has made a gesture to the Lboniinions, it is possible for us to distinguish ourselves by saying we don’t wish to impose greater difficulties on Britain at the. present time,” Mr Stewart stated. This would undoubtedly improve our credit and anything that had such an effect would be an immense advantage. It all depended whether the Prime Minister could see his way to inform the British Government that while he was grateful for the offer, he had no wish to take advantage o fit beyond the extent to which the Dominion would suffer as a result of not receiving German reparation payments. He considered th it such a course would clearly dissociate New Zealand from her neighbouring Commonwealth, and he thought that the people of the Dominion would realii* l that the effort was worth mawing. The Niemeyer Report. Mr Stewart remarked that he was pleased to sec that the Prime Minister did not propose to put through any of the proposals embodied in the Niemeyer report this session. Ample time should be allowed for consideration of matters of this nature, more particularly in view of the present very wide discussion on currency reform. Continuing the debate on the Imprest Bill, Mr W. Parry (Labour, Auckland Central) referred to unemployment an i the conditions prevailing in the country. He did not think that men on relief work should have to pay the 'levy. He was not in favour of a flat rate levy, and considered it should lie altered to a graduated levy, with ex |emption for all on low wages. Unemployed men were being given work on sports grounds when more productive work could be undertaken. Too much money was being spent on sport in New Zealand. Surely the Government could get to work on drainage and 1 other developmental schemes. The Leader of the Labour Party complained that the Government had, without the authority of Parliament, imposed very severe “cuts” on the civil servants. He referred to tho remote allowances for schools, and said that they had been cut out altogether. Continuing, he said that the Depar 4 - merit of Health had given authority to dental committees to make a charge for the treatment of children in school dental clinics, hut no child was to be excluded from treatment through in ability to pay. The Department had later sent confidential letters to th-* school committees, asking them to pay £3O per annum towards the cost'*of the material used by the dental nurses This communication also suggested that a charge of five shillings per child treated should be made annually, and that the dental officer should be given a 1 1 list of the childre’i who had not been

paid for, and who would consequently not be eligible for treatment. Tho policy could not be justified, Mr Holland said. There had never been .i suggestion during the last session thai free dental treatment, should be with drawn, and the late Prime Minister had promised to give free treatment to ul l school children in New Zealand. Mr M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West) referred to the subsidies to hospital boards, and said that in the past the House had a say in the estimate of expenditure, but this year the Minister had fixed expenditure as far as hospital boards were concerned The unemployment situation was desperate and the Government appeared to bo helpless to cope with it. The extra expense had to be borne by the hospital boards, but the Minister wanted the boards to curtail expenditure. The House adjourned at 5.30 p.m. Tho debate on the Imprest Supply Bill was continued when the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr Savage said he could not agree with tho opinion expressed by Mr Stewart that it would be wise to postpone dealing with tho question of currency. He considered that no improvement was possible if Parliament simply waited for something to turn up. War Debts Evil. Mr A. M. Samuel (Reform, Thames) said that while he admired the sentiment expressed by Mr Setwart in respect to war debt payments, he could not agree with the action suggested. “It is all very fine to put out a gesture of independence and self-reliance so long as wo can back it up with finance ” he said. “I don’t think our non-acceptance of Britain’s offer would help our credit one little bit. To my mind the present economic position ha? been brought about by a combination of circumstances, among which improve ments as a result of scientific research are important factors, but in my estimation of the greatest factor of all is the question of repayment of debts incurred during the war.” Mr Samuel said that this factor had been the means of imposing very heavy burdens on taxpayers and industries, and was keeping out of employment men in Britain as well as the Dominions Repayment of debts to America war having a strangling effect on the debtor nations and at the same time was strangling American industries as a result of a diminution in the purchasing power of the debtor nations. Gold which had been shipped to the United States was not being re-utilised. It was about as valuable as when it had been in the mines from which it originally had been taken. The offer of the United States was omlv a prelirn inary move in the direction of modification, and the ultimate cancellation of war debts. America realised that there could not a return to stable condition? until the. purchasing power of the na tions became the same as they had been before the war. Her offer had not been an impulsive one. Tt had been under consideration for some time and had been made in the hope that it would be acceptable. Stabilisation of Silver. Mr Samuel added that if the stabilisation of silver could be brought about, the troubles of Europe, as well as our own, would be at an end. The purchasing power of India and China had been reduced by over 50 per cent. While he had been at Home he had had several discussions with members of the British Ministry on the question of repayment of war debts. He realised that if New Zealand were offered a postponement it would be of immense value to th? Dominion. He thought that everybody realised that taxation had grown vastly, and the sooner it was reduced the sooner the country would get back to better times. A postponement of debt payments would enable this to he dune. When he had read of the British Government’s concession in the direction of postponing the payment of principal of Australian war debts, he had written, as an individual member of the New Zealand Parliam?nt, to tho Hon. J. H. Thomas, mentioning that he had been wondering if the same generous treatment would be extended to New Zealand. Mr Thomas had replied staring that the whole question of debt payments was under consideration. “Now that, the offer has been made,’’ Mr Samuel continued, “I trust the Government will accept it m the spirit in wli'*'i it has been made. This country can well de with a postponement or ( that payment.” Mr J. S. Fletcher (Independcn* Grey Lynn): “Is it a fair thing to ask the British taxpayers to bear New Ze;, •and’s burden?” Mr Samuel: “I won’t say that it t u fair thing to ask them to bear New Zealand’s burden, but I will say that is a fair thing for Britain to help ont of her children who has always helped her. ’ ’ He added that if the Government turned the offer down it would be doing a stark injustice to the taxpayers of this country. He could assure the House, that New Zealand’s credit was still high in the Old Land. The two main factors which were liable to dam age our credit were the pessimistic utterances which were continually being made in New Zealand, and the exagge rated reports which had been cir culated in Britain concerning the Hawke’s Bay earthquake. Unequal Sacrifice. Mr J. O’Brien (Labour, Westland» said t hat. New Zealand, as a country, had made wonderful progress during the last ten years. No other country had increased production ami wealth s<» rapidly, but because, of a temporary slump the country had been plunged into poverty. He knew that it was neeessarv to balance the Budget, but up to date the money had been taken from the defenceless civil servants an I rhe poorer people. There were no proposals to taken money from those wh - had it. (Lcft Sitting.)