INCREASE CRITICISED

Chronicle (Levin), 28 September 1946, Page 4

INCREASE CRITICISED

Press, As&jClQtion

— = — ' • - — Governor-General and His Allowances

By Telegmph-

WELLINGTON, Sept. 27. There was outspoken comment on the provision in the Finance Bill increasjng the .Governor-General 's allowances from £2000 to £4500 yearly, when the Bill i came before the Legislatiye Council this afternoon. The maia arguments against the increases were that it involved a breach of stahilisation procedure and that the cost of offiee was out o'f proportion to New Zealand 's sniall population. ... "In the judgment of many- people this is very much at varianee with our stahilisation procedure," said Hon, W. Grounds (Auckland), ' ' so. that the question -arises whether stabilisatiom should continue. Is" not New Zealand inclined to be exp.ending too much on frills and farthiugales he asked, land added, "Were we not in this matter getting ahead of anrselye&?" Hon. T. Bloodworth (Auckland) said it was a pity a full statement could not have been made when the inerease was first aunounced. A lot of embarrassment might have been saved had that eourse been followed. There canld be no logical arugument put up for the continuation of staoilisatiou for men on ; the lowest wages when sueh increases were being given to the highest in the land. Stahilisation could not be used to keep the lowest law when the highest, were being put Mgher. Horn W. Lerry (Wellington) said if ' it were now necessary to raise the expense alloAvance of the GovernorGeneral, it appeared to him that for a. long time past in New Zealand tlie Governor-General had been treated unjustly and ungenerously. When one considered the position now, one wondered how much it had cost tlie predecessors of the present Governor-General to hold tliat position. One would almo,st think by the way Members had spoken that the liigh ealibre Englishman selected for the position of GovernorGeneral of New Zealand should be requi red before he accepted the position, to pay the New Zealand Government or New Zealand people £10,000 yearly for the privilege. Ilon. A. McLagan, replyring to the arguments, said stabilisation regulations set out to peg as at a certain date, the rates of remuneration including fees and similar payments for services rendered. The amount allowed the Governor-General was not a rate of remuneration and was not a fee for services rendered but was an allowanee in respect of costs unavoidably incurred. For some time the amount allowed in respect of these costs had been considerably less than the actual costs and the Governor-General had had to meet the balance from his own pocket. Had the allowanee not been increased it vvoubl have meant that the position of Governor-General wouhi have been reserved for persons with eonsiderable private wealth and only for persons of eonsiderable private wealth. There was no breach of stabilisation in increasing the allowances which could have been increased eariier witliout anyone being able to say a breach had been eommitted.