THE STATE ADVANCES INQUIRY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1592, 8 November 1912, Page 3

THE STATE ADVANCES INQUIRY.

DEBATE IN PARLIAMENT. AN ALL.NIQHT SITTING. :' -I'. '. '. - THEREPORT ADOPTED. Affer The Dominion wont to press yesterdtfy) the debate in the House of Representatives on the report of the Publio Accounts Committee upon its inquiry into tho administration of the State-Guarau-teed Advances Department was oontinued until after 8 a:m. Eventually the House approved the roport of tho committee, and passed, the New Zealand State-Guaranteed Advances. Amendment Bill. _ Continuing the discussion upon Mr. Hanan's amendment, from the point to which it was carried in Thb'Dominion report of. yesterday, Mr. G. W. Kussell (Avon) said-the witnesse.g had been summoned to the committee for no other purpose, than to prove improper political influence against tho Government. The whole gravamen of the charge was the-al-legation of political influence in the matter of loans. He was of opinion that the draft report supposed to have been prepared by the chairman could not have been prepared'by Mr. Hine. He had not sufficient', literary ability. It had como from someone :else: Ho' declared that the members' of the board were able civil servants and men of'the highest integrity. It waj.now proposed that there should be a change.in the• personnel of the board. Who was.the member, that was to be attacked? If- this report were passed, it would show that no civil servants career was sa.fe'from party animus. Mr. B. M'Callum (Wairau) said it was .the"greatest act ;■ of degradation this country-.had ever seen to see our public men maligned' in this way. The findings of tho committee were not in accordanco with' facts. Underlying the business was concentrated venom,' concentrated' spleen and malice of the. worst type. If things of this'/kind Iwere' done, he had no desire to stay in -Parliament. Mr. Nosworthy: You won't stay there in 'any case. ' ■ Mr. A: M.-Myers (Auckland East) said honourable members were practically condemning gentlemen who had served the public well in a long period. The most they had been guilty of was a possible breach through mistake of the regulations.' And yet they were to be branded with a stigma, which would stay with them to tlwir dyinfe day: He moved that the recommendation after the' words "letter" be deleted. This meant the excision of the recommendation that the personnel of the board should.be changed. Mr. Speaker ruled the < amendment out of order.-'-.' .' ••' '.'.'• Mr. Myers suggested that the Minister should, with the indulgence of the House, move the amisridmp'nt himself. Mr. Alhjh refused to do this. . An Amendment. ;■ Mr. R.'.W.' Smith;(Waimarino) said that what was being' done by the House was unfair and. contemptible. He moved an amendment to- add to the report the following:' ."That effect be not given to the;recommendation of the Committee until the .question at issue has been submitted'tb a Supreme Court Judge for his decision.: Mr. G.':. Witty (Siccarton) seconded the amendment.;. He likened the Minister for Finance to an animal which tracked its prey, to the / that animal was the weasel, v. .''-, .v -. .... . ; \- ; Mr, G; J. 'Anderson:'.Point of order. Is it competent;'for any member of this House to' liken or compare another member to a weasel. .<■ . Mr. Speaker":; I understood it was the conduct of ; a' weasel that the honourable member was referring to. Mr.' Witty:;' Thank. you, Mr.. Speaker.> It'was to bis actions I was referring and not to the Minister himself! -The debate was carried on by Messrs. Isitt and Hindmarsh. ■ , .. .The .Hon.. F. Mr B;' Fisher said that the alteration of three words in the recommendation of th'e .Committee would show that there was. nothing wrong with it. '"'So'.altered, 'the "reerammendation would read: The evidence has led the House to,- the conclusion ■ that insufficient control was exercised in administering the loans to local authorities especially in cora Sitting the Department to advances three years ahead, an action which the House is advised was contrary to law. The House therefore strongly recommends a change in the .personnel ; of the government." . Mr. Fisher went on to defend the report-of the committee.. Mr. Forbes: What is it there'for? Mr/Fisher:- What is it there for? To get rid of the board—that is the plain English of.it. Mr. Forbes: Why not say "an alteration in the constitution of the board." The.Other End of the Telescope. •Mr. Fisher said' that probably if the phrase suggested had been used it would have been objected to. He heard the hon."member for Waimarino laugh, but he remembered that in 1910, when he (the Minister) moved to refer the Hine charges to two Judges of the Supreme Court, the member for Waimarino voted against it. He was looking through the other end of the telescope now. : Mr. Fisher went on to state that he took it that the recommendation of the committee was that the board in its'present form should bo abolished. If the abolition of the board took tho Minister for.Finance off it, was not that a stain-upon his own.honour? . The committee recommended that the personnel of the board should be changed. The Hon.. R. M'Kenzie: Are you going to import put in their places, or ballot- for- them,.', which ? Mr. Fisher said that he agreed with the recommendation. To his mind it was the same as if a member on the other side moved a vote of want of confidence in the Government: on account of maladministration, i Would it then be said that a stair? had been placed upon the members of the Government? Mr.-J.. Colyin(Buller) said that if Mr. .'Poyhton.:were hounded out of the service it would'be' the greatest stain that had ever : rested on ' the Reform party. Tho Minister had-acted as prosecutor. < Tho. Hon; Jae: Allen said that the bon. gentleman was labouring under a misapprehension', and' he wished to remove it, because'he-valued the opinion of the member for■':Buller; :: , He .(the Minister) had made-no charge against Mr. Poynton or any member- of: the board, and he had not acted as prosecutor. He did say that -the administration of the board had been bad./ There "had been a breach, of the law.-' There "was no doubt about that— the .SolicitbrrGeneral had said so. The Minister said' that.if hon. members want-' ed to sacrifice him he was not going to be sacrificed-.Without a fight at anyrate. Mr. Colyin... said .that he had charged the Minister with nothing else than that he was-, against'the'administration'of the board.''•''■- : - .;■■ ' ; .' ' M.r.G; Laurenson (Lyttelton) said that if the House' 'wanted *n illustration of the evils of' late'-sitt'inEJs they had it in the last. - two speeches >'' delivered by Ministers. ; .:';' '■ ■'■■"' Dr. Ppniare: And this one now. Mr. Laurenson: You are not a Minister of the Crown anyway. • He went,on to criticise the''speeches of Mr. .Fisher and Mr. Aiien. ;• ■•:.'■ Proved Up to the Hilt. The Hon.' W. I'. Massey (Prime Minister) said: the. imputation that the Finance Minister: liad ''delivered a' hard, bitter speech was unjustified. It was a cool and clear speech,-and the Minister for Finance had'proved his case up to the hilt. On ono occasion when the Estimates were under discussion ah honourable member had moved' to-reduce, an item as an indication that .'more ought to be lent to local bodies than: .£SOOO, ond : the Minister had to show that- money ' was 'being advanced by the board at less than:'it cost. This was tho ■beginning-of the complaint against the Advances' Board. At the inquiry the gentlemen oh the board had 6hown by thoir evidence that they had not grasped their work from a business point of view. If two of the' present, members of the board were dropped and two better business men'■ put in their places, who could say that' the board would not be improved'? A'nd'he'believed, that this was what was contemplated from the recommendation of the committee. He asked the members of the Opposition to let this matter, go to' a vote. If the • Government wos doing wrong .it : would take the responsibility, and the-public 'would/judge it accordingly. . ':••' ■■■■'■ The. Hon. R. M'Kenzie (Motueka) said that thft object of the commitiM 1 * tmm

mendntions was to secure the dismissal of tho Superintendent or members of the, board. He did not know whether tho regulations undor which tho board had worked wero legal or illegal, hut he was csrtain that it did not rest with the members of tho board to ascertain the legality of the regulations. The members of the board were entitled to an impartial trial before au independent tribunal. Mr. E. Newman (JUngitikei) defended the committee from the charge that they had been biased or 'unfair. The committee had not meant to challenge the personal character of the members of the board. ' Mr. W. D. S. Macdonaid <Bay of Plenty) said he had never known a worse instance of Tammanyismthan that which was before tho House. Tho Government were going to strike a blow at the safety of the Oivil Service.

The Back-nloqks Starved, Mr. C. K. Wilson (Tautnaruuui) said there was no proposal to dismiss the members of tho board from the Civil Service. All the board recommended was that tho personnel of the board should be changed, and it was the Committee's duty to recommend a ckango in the personnel of a board which had so mismanaged . the country's loan moneys. The people in the back country had been asking for loans, and they had been' refused time and again, the reason being that there were no funds. The back country settlers had been starved, while the money had been absorbed by big wealthy corporations and harbour boards, to be spent on undertakings that' wero not productive. Tho money, had been used in a way that had been, injurious to the best interests of tho country. 'Mr. J. A. Hnnan (Invereargill) said every member Who voted for the motion would disgrace himself. He was called upon to withdraw the word "disgrace," and he used instead the expression "contempt and ridicule." _At the Speaker's direction he had to withdraw the word "ridicule." ; Sir Joseph Ward (Awarua) said that it was incorrect to say that the ' backblocks had been neglected. The Taumarunui electorate had been especially favoured. All country local bodies who had the necessary were granted all tho loans they applied for. Until the loans became so large- that the State could not go on finding the Money. Then the maximum amount had been reduced to .£5009 for all local bodies, Without any differentiation in favour of the big .local bodies. Amendments Defeated-Mofion Carried. A division was taken.on the amendment at 6.40 q.m. The amendment was defeated by 37 votes to 26, Mr. J. Payne (Grey Lynn) continued the debate on the principal question, and moved as an amendment: "That the report be not given effect to ■ until the House has passed legislation dealing with tho matter. ■ Mr. A. E. Glover (Auckland Central) made a jaded House laugh—-at him % Mr. J. B. Hine" (Stratford),' chairman of the.Committee, rose*.to reply nt 7.20 a.m. He took exception to the ''poisonous attack" made on the Minister for Finance, and justified the Committee's action in censuring the Board.- It was not suggested that the Board hac. done anything that was essentially wrong, mit they had failed to discharge their trust in the best interests of the country.. They had got Tid of all the money coming under their care, exercising no discretion as to amounts to be allowed. ■ ■ -A division was called at 7.30 ft.m. on the motion that the report do lie on the table, and the, motion was carried by 36 votes to 26. The Bill Again. The Hon.W. F. Massey 6aid. he proposed to take the Committee stage of the Now Zealand State Guaranteed Advances Amendment Bill, and the Bill was forthwith committed. . ~; An amendment.proposed by Mr. Ell to make it ■ compulsory for mortgagors Under -the Act to insure with the Sfaie Fire Insurance Department was lost ,by 33 votes to 21. . . i The Bill was ■ reported with one minor amendment. . The third reading was carried on tho voices shortly after S o'clock. , : ,