PARLIAMENT.

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160692, 3 July 1920, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ■ t (Per United Press Association.) WELLINGTON, July, 2. Tho House met at 2.30. REPLIES TO QUESTIONS. The Minister of Lands, replying to Mr S.- G. Smith, said he could not take notice of published statements made by irresponsible persons without having an opportunity to inquire into them. Speaking offhand, he could say the allegation that returned soldiers who had taken up land in the Taranaki district were being exploited was unfounded. If the member would put a question on the Order Paper the Minister would furnish a complete! refutation of every allegation made in the statement quoted by Mr Smith. The Minister of Public Works, in answer to Mr Jennn.gs, said the Dopartment would do all possible to facili tate the re-erection of bridges damaged or destroyed by the recent floods, which would impose a great hardship on settlers, especially those engaged in the dairying industry. The president of the Board of Trade informed Mr Forbes that inquiry ' was being mad© by tbe Board of Trade into the profits made by' the woollen industries.

WANGANUI BOROUGH COUNCIL EMPOWERING BILL. The Wanganui Borough Council Vesting and Empowering Bill (Mr Veitch) was read a first time. ADDRESS-IN-REPLY DEBATE. Mr W. D. Lysnar resumed the debate on the Address-in-Reply. He said he had no confidence in the Board of Trade. Its inquiries were too late. He quoted the case of investigation of woollen goods prices, which should have been done four years ago. The Board should investigate traders’ books and taka prompt action against profiteering. The Board of Agriculture also needed rejuvenation. He urged increased settlement of land. He declared the Meat and Shipping Trusts were at work in New Zealand, and it was the duty of the Government to see that these were not licensed to export. Mr Lysnar urged that all unused virgin country, native or pakeha-owned, should be taken by the Government, tbe idle owners to receive market value therefor. The Maoris were anxious for power to deal with their own land, so that tho best use could be made of it. He urged the repeal of the anti-shouting law: The present licensing monopoly, which had been aided by the Prohibitionists’ tactics, should be broken up. It should fee possible to increase licensed accommodation where necessary. Taxation should be reduced very materially.

DR THACKER. Dr Thacker urged the Government to remember the part played by women in connection with the late and added that these women were going to help in reconstruction work. Dr Thacker referred to the presence and ramifications in New Zealand of the Trust in connection with the meat trade, and declared that meat for which the producer received 5d per lb was sold to the workman at Home during the war at anything up to Is lOd per lb. He asked where the difference had gone. Why were outsiders allowed to go to the yards and force local butchers to pay more? The speaker referred also to other failures of the Government to protect consumers by seeing that prices of food materials were kept down to reasonable levels. Dr Thacker strongly advocated better control of motors and other - vehicles, with annual renewal of licenses. The country could save .£65,000 yearly in decreased haulage costs if concrete roads were laid down.

MR HORN. Mr J. Horn (Wakatipu) urged that the country’s stocks of precious bituminous coal should be conserved, and greater efforts made to develop supplies of brown coal, which was equally as good for domestic purposes. Mr Horn urged modification of the size of some of the electorates. In his own case he represented just half the province of Otago, which was maSiif-estly beyond any one man’s capacity to do properly. The House adjourned at 5.30. MR HOLLAND. When the House resumed at 7.30 the debate on the Address-in-Reply was continued by Mr Holland, who said the reason there was a Labour Party in New Zealand to-day was that both Liberal and Reform Parties had voiced class distinction in their legislation, and against which Labour had to protest. It had been said that the Labour Party were extremists, but what were the early Christians but Extremists, and how could they have made Christianity what it was if they had not been,extremists? Tt had been said that Labour was not loyal. That was a term that sadly needed defining. Coming to the question of the “go-slow” policy, he contended that there was unquestionable evidence of “'going-slow” in wheat-growing, and the reason for this was precisely the same as the “go-slow” on the part of the miners. When it did not pay to hew coal, the miner would not do it, and when it did not pay to grow wheat, the* farmer would not grow it. But there was the difference; That when the miner would not hew the coal the Government came along and prosecuted him. When the farmers .refused to grow wheat the Government called a conference and raised the price. There was a shortage of coal in the Dominion, due entirely to our planless system of, production. He claimed that there was abundance of coal in the Dominion, and called upon the Government to develop new fields. One of the scandals in this connection was the coalfield on the West Coast, oa which the Government spent .£BOOO m prospecting, and then turned it over . to a private company, which was reaping all tbe benefit from the Government expenditure. After adversely criticising the Nauru agreement, he proceeded to make charges of theft against certain officers of the Prison Department, and concluded by affirming that the Labour Party would support the amendment because they were against

the Government. If the Liberal Party should, as a result, get on the Government Benches, the Labour Party would support measures, not men. So soon as the Liberal measures failed to reach the Labour standard, the Labour Party would fight them and endeavour, to drive both Liberals and Piefornicrs into one camp, whore no doubt they properly belonged. DR NEWMAN. ' Dr Newman complained that there was no policy in the speech calculated to cheer the people. Many items were mentioned, but they were merely a litany of woe, with but one crumb of comfort. and that was increase in members’ salaries, which was to be free from income tax. To that he strongly objected. The evils which the people of the Dominion had to face at the present were more serious than those of any previous time in the history of the country, and in attempting to give relief, the Government were simply going on the principle of a merry-go-round. When the fanner complained of the low price of wheat, Ministers went south and made a bargain with the farmers for a higher price, but they did not consult the workingman, whose bread was going to be increased in price in consequence. He deplored the failure of the profiteering tribunals, which were the scorn and derision of the people. In England thousands of people had been prosecuted, and profiteering had been checked. Hero nothing worth while was being done, and profiteering was rampant. Food should be stored by the Government in summer, as squirrels, ants and bees did, to reduce the cost in winter. The housebuilding scheme of the Government was a farce, yet there was no more pressing need of the people than house accommodation. He drew attention to anomalies in taxation, which pressed unfairly on men with families, and declared that members were willing to stay in Wellington to revise the Customs tariff in order to relieve the poorer classes. Instead of carrying rich farmers’ lime on the-railways free of cost, why not bring a lot of potatoes from the south, where they had a glut, to the north, where they are a real necessity. Coal should be carried free, because there was a real shortage which was likely to continue for many winters, and the people were going to suffer greatly until the big hydro-electric works could be completed. He deprecated the waste of effort contemplated in attempting too many of these works at the same time. 'Let the Government complete- tne Mangauao scheme first, then works such as Waikaremoana could be started with advantage. He hoped the speech did not "contain all the good things the Government had in store for them, otherwise the result would be disappointing.

MR BARTRUM. Mr Bartrum (Grey Lynn) said one of the first things the Labour Party would do when they got on the Government Benches, where they soon would be, was to give the Dominion a proper system of representation. The member for Rotorua had advocated an immigration scheme to bring out help for rich mothers in the backblocks. He was not concerned about the rich mothers in the backblocks, but was concerned about the thousands of working-women bringing up large families who were completely vvorn out. He was therefore opposed to any scheme of immigration until something was done to give better living conditions in the towns. One of tho means by which this could be done was reduction in the price of goods purchased by the people. He instanced tho case of an overcoat made in New Zealand which cost £2 13s, but for which he had to pay £5 15s. He wanted to know where the difference between the cost of production and the price charged to the purchaser went, ancf it was tho duty of the Government to find out. Profiteering was going on all round, and this would not end until the workingclasses could take hold of essential industries and control production. Cottage hospitals should be established in the backblocks. More humanism should be introduced into our legislation, and if the Government brought down legist tion of a constructive character, they would receive the support of the Labour Party.

On the motion of Mr Edie, the debate was adjourned, and at 10.51 the House rose till 2.30 on Tuesday.