PUBLIC FINANCES

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 75, Issue 90, 16 April 1932, Page 9

PUBLIC FINANCES

THE ADIUSTMENT BILL DEBATE IN PARLIAMENT MR. HARRIS’ CRITICISM' WELLINGTON, April 15. Urgency was accorded the second reading debate on the National Expenditure Adjustment Bill when the of Representatives met this morning. The strongest speech so far heard m criticism of the Bill from the Govern- ■ ment benches was macle by the member : for Waiteinata, Mr A. Harris, who in- ; timated that he will vote against certain proposals in committee. Continuing the debate, Mr F. Jones (Labour, Dunedin South) said that the Government was creating a •country of paupers. Its policy had resulted in more sickness and more crime. He said that the salaries of the heads of the different State Departments had been greatly increased since 1916, and the sacrifices they were making were nothing compared with those of the rank and file. Many of those receiving old age pensions had to pay for their keep at different institutions, and had very little money for little luxuries. The Government was reducing soldiers' pensions, but allowing tax free war bonds to escape. Mr A. M. Samuel (Government, Thames): “They have slashed in all directions without making due inquiry.’’ Mr Harris said that the constant economy cry was doing incalculable harm in the country. The trouble was that the people with money to spend were being encouraged to withhold expenditure. Prosperity would not be restored by destroying spending power by wage reductions. He contended that the plight of the primary producers was not as bad as that of those in need in the cities. He questioned whether the Government was really concerned with rpstoring the country’s prosperity, and suggested it was more concerned with tho immediate Budgetary position. Such a policy must lead the country from bad to worse, and he predicted there would be a further cut next February. He declared emphatically that he believed the Government’s policy was wrong and entirely unsound, lie would support the second reading lor those portions of the Bill he agreed with, but in committee he would vote against the wage cut and the reduc- . tions in old age, widows’, and soldiers’ dependants* pensions. A Member: “What is the alternative'?” Mr Harris: fi A voluntary conversion - loan. ” Mr J. McCombs (Labour, Lyttelton) said that, there had been no necessity ■ to repudiate either wages contracts or interest rates. Mr Samuel: “Does the Lahor.r Party advocate interest reductions 1 ?” Mr McCombs: “Yes, but only as a logical corollary to wage reductions." He said that tho Government’s policy was turning a drop of £20,000,000 in ihe exports into a fall of £60,000,000 in the national income. The provisions for the reductions of rent in the Bill were a fine piece of make-believe. The qualifications made the supposed reductions farcical. Mr AV. A. Veitch (Government, Wan- I ganui) expressed the opinion that ten Ministers was too few in the present conditions, and he suggested that the Prime Minister should ask some of his friends to join him without portfolios. Air McCombs: “Have they got any friends?” Last year, said Air Harris, the Prime Minister had appealed to the Judges of the Supreme Court to accept a redaction in salary, but they had refused the appeal, in spite of the fact that one of the Judges, sitting on the Arbitration Court, had cut the wAges of the workers. Members' salaries Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Government, i Otago Central) said that the serious; aspect of salary reductions was that, they had the appearance of being per manent. Under the Bill members oi Parliament would receive a substantial reduction in honorarium, and no mem < ber considered that he should be exempt from the sacrifice that the community was being called upon to bear, 1 but the member of Parliament was the • poorest-paid individual in the service : of the State. Misleading statements : had been made in tho Press and by ill-informed persons that members were receiving special treatment, but those < representing isolated districts were severely penalised. Visiting members had to keep two homes going, and even the most conservative were find ing it absolutely impossible to live on their honoraria. Representatives of firms and Civil Servants received trav oiling allowances, but all a member tp ceived for this purpose was £3 13s per vear. Tho members of the National Expenditure Commission had made grossly misleading statements about tho privileges of members, who, in , reality, were Rs poor as Lazarus. A member had many calls on his services which he could not resist, as they were part of the system. One member had told him that he vas able to attend Parliament only because , his family maintained the home. This , was not' to the honour or credit of . the country. Endeavours to belittle members of Parliament did not reflect to the credit of those responsible. The New Zealand Parliament had a glorious record, of which the country was proud. The commission had referred to the railway and steamer passes given to members, but the cost of these was only a book-keeping entry between departments. On an average a member travelled 4000 miles per year by motor and had to foot the bill. The commission had made a statement that Parliament was an exclusive club in which members lived in the lap of luxury. The meals at Bellamy’s cost more than meals in the town, and during the session Bellamy’s ; showed a substantial profit. The rea- ! son why there was an apparent loss : was because cleaning and caretaking ; charges for the building were also ■ charged to Bellamy’s. The stamp al ; lowance of £2 per month which mem ■ bers received would not pay for their I bureau calls. If members received as I much as the commission they would be rich beyond tho dreams of avarice The statements made by the commission were typical of the little men ■ who had made them. Had the salaries : not boen adequate the giants of the past, such as Seddon and Massey, ; would never have been able to sit in ■ Parliament for long terms. « Mr. D. W. Coleman (Labour, Gis- ' boma) declared that during the past

twelve months there had been no re < duction, but an increase, in the total | cost of the necessaries of life. 11* • admitted that tho price of certain ( foodstuffs had decreased. He trusted ( that those members who had pledge I themselves at the General Election to t oppose pensions reductions would ad s here to these pledges. Entirely Unsound Policy Air. A. Harris (Government, Waite- 1 mata) said he was convinced that, thn methods proposed in the Bill would not have appreciable effect in the df v rection desired by the Government; on c the contrary, it was probable that the j drift would become worse. Promises } given by the Government at the time j of the last cut had not been given effect to; wholesale dismissals had f been made coincident with the reduc- - tion in salaries. Air. Harris expressed surprise that the members of t the Economy Commission had not of- i fered to forego their remuneration as I an economy in the country’s hour of ’ need. He deprecated the value of tho 1 report, and said half-a-dozen members j 1 of Parliament could have done tho J work with much more.value nt no j cost. Air. Veitch endorsed references to ‘ the hardship placed on the workers, ’ particularly in the cities, by wagd to- ’ ductions, and said the Government should endeavour to carry out con- 1 structive works that would be of value to the country. He urged ex ( penditure of the unemployment moneys ' on unfinished public works, such as ‘ railways, and he mentioned in lar the Gisborne line, which must be ' finished sooder or later. The work! could at least be pushed ahead as far as money would allow. The debate on the second reading of * tho Bill was continued this afternoon. Mr. W. Nash (Labour) expressed the ’ opinion that the Government’s economy, measures in reducing tho spending capacity of people would lead to disaster. ■ Ho did not regard the half per cent, concession which he understood the , banks were to make in interest rates as amounting to the same share of sacrifice as that being contributed by ' other rates of interest and in rents. Mr. H. Atmore said the Government was taking the wrong course in the Bill before the House. Financial ' “bleeding” was not the cure for financial pernicious anaemia. There was more of what constituted real wealth in New Zealand to-day than ever before. The science of production had

outstripped tho science of distribution because the distribution had been held in check by a foolish adherence to and out. of date gold basis for international exchange. Air. H. G. R. Mason said he regarded the Government as primarily representing the money lenders. Some help had been given to the farmers but no aid was forthcoming for tho traders, who were a vital section of the com > nunity. Tho Oil Companies. Afr. J. A. Nash said he did not agree with the proposal that Public Servants should submit to a further salary cut. He considered the Government, should be receiving money from the oil com panics. Mr. Samuel: They could get enough from the oil companies to prevent pen sion cuts. Afr. MeKeen said there was no need to go outside New Zealand to borrow money when there were £30,000,000 in frozen credits in the banks. It was true that the banks reinvested the money, but he questioned whether they invested it in the best interests of the people of New Zealand. Afr. Jull said there was a plethora of boards in New Zealand to-day and ho advocated reducing the number with the object of bringing down administration expenses. Ffe thought that Committees of the House might be set up to do a lot of work at present done by boards. ‘ Afr. Dickie said that if any alterna tivo to pension reductions could be found he would gladly support it. He suggested a further tax on amusements as an alternative. Afr Samuel said there were certain features of the Bill (ineluding civil service cuts and pensions reduction* against which ho would vote in com inittee. He would vote for the second reading because of parts of the Bill of which he approved. Replying to tho debate the Rt. Hon. .G-, W. Forbes said ho envied tho position of those who were able to discuss tho Bill in freedom from responsibility, but he had to point out that unless the utmost economy and prudoneo were exercised it would not even be possible to make the payments which members ha*, criticised. If there were a crash in national finances there would be no opportunity to pay pensions or elvil servants’ salaries at all. Tho Bill was read a second time hr 46 votes to 25 and the House rose at 5.50 p-m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday afternoon.