PARLIAMENTARY.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume III, Issue 697, 25 July 1882, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Monday, July 24. The House met at 7- 30 p. m. PAPERS. The following reports and papers were laid on the table :—Report of the Transfer and Deeds Registration Department; circular to local bodies, and all the answers received ; fees received in the Supreme Court at Dunedin, Christchurch, Wellington, and Auckland. LOAN BILLS. A message was received from the Governor containing the two Loan Bills. The message is to be considered in committee to-morrow. THE TEN PER CENT. REDUCTION. The Hon. Major Atkinson rose and moved that the Speaker leave the chair in order that the House might go into Committee of Supply. Mr Smith moved as an amendment — “That, as the 10 per cent, reduction, made for the purpose of temporary retrenchment in the salaries of the civil servants has how been restored, in the opinion of this Heuse, the same advantage should be extended to the platelayers and other wages men employed by the Government on the railways and other public works of Now Zealand, they having received a similar reduction on their wages, which in their case has not yet been restored.” He said he moved this motion to fulfil a pledge given to his constituents. It was argued that the Government could get men at the present wages. Men could be got to do the work at one-third of the present rate, but they would not be competent workmen. If the increase was not given the best men would leave. He hoped an increase would be given. If not a shilling, at least of sixpence a day. After discussion, in which Messrs Shepherd, Johnston, Duncan, Weston, McKenzie, Moss, and Sir John Hall took part, Mr Seddon said he was sorry Government had determined to make this a noconfidence motion. The wages of the platelayers in other Australian colonies, including Victoria, were a shilling a day higher than the wages in this colony, and cottages were provided for them there. He trusted the amendment would be carried. He was forced to vote for it, because he felt that those men had not received their dues in the past. He hoped the Government would accept this motion as it had done other motions, and not treat it as a want of confidence vote.

Sir George Grey said this was not a vote of want of confidence. That would come in due time. Simple justice was asked for these men.

Mr Macandrew said he did not regard this as a censure or vote of want of confidence, but would vote for the amendment.

The Hon. Major Atkinson said the difference between Mr Saunders’ motion and the present was that in one case taxation was to be taken off the people and in the other it was to be increased, and this could not be done on the motion of a private member without the consent of the Crown. Anybody reading the amendment would see it was a very serious vote of censure. The question was not the justice of the case under discussion, but whether the House was to interfere in a way which must destroy all discipline by its Executive Government. He asked the House to decide the point, and he would accept it cheerfully which ever way it did so. Members should stand together and resist the pressure of any class of public servants. He invited the House to vote against the resolution ; but whatever the result was, he was quite prepared to accept the responsibility of it. Mr Montgomery said he was told that the Government was going to accept the resolution in a friendly spirit. The salaries of these men had been reduced, and should be readjusted the same as other public servants. He would support the amendment. After further discussion,

Mr Levin said lie was sure the Minister of Public Works was fully determined to do the railway employees justice. The proposal of the member for Waipawa had been rightly treated as a vote of want of confidence. The mover of the resolution should have been advised to withdraw it. If there was heart in the Opposition they should have tabled a direct vote of want of confidence. Mr Sheehan said he would vote for the motion, because he believed it to be a fair and proper action. The restoring of salaries should have begun with the laboring classes. He hoped the proposer of the resolution would withdraw it. Mr Buchanan understood that the Government had the question under consideration. He would vote against the amendment. Mr Bracken condemned the action of the Government in treating the question as a “ no-confidence motion.”

Mr Smith, to put himself in order, moved the adjournment of the debate, and explained that he brought forward the motion solely on his own responsibility as a private member. He would now withdraw the amendment if it was the wish of the House, Mr Hutchison said if it had not been for the discussion on the amendment the railway employees would not havereceived anything extra, as the Min ster of Public Works had repeatedly stated he would not increase the pay of these men. Mr White (Sydenham) said the employees on the railways and other laboring classes were entitled to a rise in pay. A man could not fairly live on six shillings. He might exist. It would be better for the colony if the lowest rate of wages was eight shillings. He thought the Minister of Public Works would give an increase, but he would go further than the member for Waipawa, and provide for the men receiving extra pay for overtime.

Mr Shrimski did not agree with the course taken by the member who proposed the amendment. Mr Allwright said he knew that it was the intention of the Government to do justice to these men. He would oppose the amendment.

Major Harris said he would have thought the restoring of the rate of pay would have been granted to labor men before others.

The question was put that leave be given to the mover to withdraw the amendment, but it was refused.

Mr Barron protested against the action of the Government in refusing to allow the amendment to be withdrawn.

Colonel Trimble supported the action of the Government, and condemned the Opposition which did not follow an appointed leader or party.

Mr Moss said the Government was responsible for the disorganised condition of the House. They should have resigned months’ ago, when they were in a minority. Mr Weston said when the Government had the opportunity©! testing theirstrength with the Opposition, they had not done so. He could not submit to the action of the Government, and had deserted them, and was proud to say so. The House waa held up to contempt and ridicule by all the newspapers of the colony, and the Government was responsible for this, and the sooner a vote of no confidence was proposed and carried and new men perched on the Government benches the better. Mr Whitaker condemned the action of the Opposition. Mr Hurst begged the Government to allow the question to go on the voices. Mr Thomson (Clutha), said the Government was responsible for the disorganisation of the House, delaying the business, and waste of time.

Mr Morris said the Government side wished a no-confidence motion to be brought on, and decided one way or the other, and the business gone on with. As to the wages of railway employees, if there were plenty of applicants, he did not see why their pay should be increased unless the Government wished to do so.

Mr Hobbs said the delay in the business was caused by the disorganised state of the Opposition. Messrs Levestam and Holmes spoke against the Government. Mr Smith said he did not look on the question as a party question, he only desired a public expression from the Minister of Public Works. Ha had carefully avoided making this a party question. He had the interest of the poor working men at heart, who were not receiving pay sufficient to support their families. He believed the debate had done good in getting an expression of opinion from members that these men had a grievance. He thanked the members for the good-natured manner they had debated the question. Mr Bryce said, in asking leave to Withdraw the amendment, Mr Smith had coupled it with a condition that it should be given practical effect to by Government. He took it if a division was taken on this proposal all the Opposition members would have voted for it, and been beaten.

Mr Montgomery said all the Opposition members would not vote for it. The motion that the debate be adjourned was negatived on the voices, and the original motion to go into committee of supply was carried on the voices. In committee a motion to report progress was made. The committee divided.—Ayes, 19 ; noes, 42. Tho motion for reporting progress was lost. The Estimates were then considered. Class 2—Colonial Secretary, L 25,880. — Mr Duncan moved—“ That the item L 15,000 for ‘ repairs to dips, expenses of working Cattle, Rabbit, Sheep, and Brands Acts, and contingencies,’ should be reduced by L 12,000.” Mr Feldwiok proposed—“ That item L 24,000, six chief inspectors, be reduced by L 200,” The question was put that the item L 2,400 be reduced L 200. Ayes, 33 : noes, 27. The motion to reduce the item was lost, and progress was reported and the House adjourned at 7.20 a. m.