REPLIES TO QUESTIONS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1852, 11 September 1913, Page 4

REPLIES TO QUESTIONS.

A BELATED DISCUSSION. THE PUBLIC TRUST REPORT. Only the last half-hour of the afternoon sitting was spent- in the discussion of questions. When the House resumed in the evening, Mr. Laiireiison asked tho I'riine Minister if he had any objection to continuing the discussion on questions. Tho'Primo Minister said that be had no obicction to tho discussion bcinc

continued for tlio remainder of tlio usual two hours. Sir. T. K. Sidey: That is hartley fair to private members' Bills. Mr. Massey: Very well. I am sorry tlio lion, gentleman was not present at 0.30 p.m. I indicated then that it was more the business of members who have private Bills than mine. Mr. Sidey said that it was. "rather rough" on private members who had Bills, but did not press tlio objection, and the discission, of questions was resumed. THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE'S REPORT. ANOTHER MINISTERIAL STATEMENT. A long discussion occurred on the reply given by the Hon. A.'L. Herdman to a question by Mr. G. Laurenson. Tlio question drew tho attention of tho Minister to the fact that a summary of tlio report of tho Public Trustee had appeared in a local journal, and asked Ijim why tho report had not been submitted to tho llouso. Tho Minister's reply was: ''My attention has been drawn to the synopsis of tho matter to which tho lion, gentleman refers. The reasons for the document not being laid boforo the House have already been publicly stated." .Mr. G. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) attacked the Minister for his action, in refusing to lay on tho table of tho Houso tho Annual report of tho Public Trustee. He protested against the House being treated in this way by tlio Minister.

Mr. T. BUXTON (Teniuka) said ho had an idea that the advortisoment of the office by placards in tho railway stations and notices in tho newspapers, which had led to an. increase of legal business through tho office, was being stopped. This increase of legal business had saved tho people of Now Zealand, the Public Trustee had said, £10,000. Mr. Hordman: Do you want to mako a legal bureau of it? Mr. Buxton: I want to mako the office as useful as possible to tie people. A great deal of business, he said, was being kept away from tho office, and people were driven to tho private solicitors, \vlio charge enormous fees for it. Mr. G. "WITTY (Riccarton) also commented unfavourably on the Minister's action in having refused to lay tho report on tho table. Mr. Massey: It was not in the hands of the Government.

Mr. Witty asked how the report had gotli into tho hands of tho paper. ■Mr. Hordman: I've got a very strong suspicion of how it got there.

Mr. Witty: I know the honourable gentleman is of a suspicious nature. It's a sign of guilt. Mr. Herries: A sign of guiltl It's a sign of treachery. Mr. Witty took exception to the implication that thero was treachery on tho part of some member of tho Opposition. Tho suggestion, he said, was unworthy of tho Minister. Mr. Herries assured Mr. Witty that he was not accusing any member of the House. Ho had accused the newspaper.

Mr. L. M. ISITT' (Christchurch North) said he co.uld not understand the Minister's denial that the report was in tho hands of the Government. Was not tho report printed at the Government Printing Office? It seemed to him that the reply was more equivocation, intended to deceive the House. Tho summary of tho report showed why the report had been suppressed, and justified the accusation against tho Government that they were standing for the legal monopoly. The intention of the Goverument to support monopoly was made clear. Did the suppression of tho report not mean that, the fees of lawyers wero more dear to tho Minister than the welfare of tho peoplo of the Dominion? The Minister Replies. Tho Hon. A. L. HERDMAN said ho wished to refer to tho speech delivered by tho member for Lyttelton in reference to the Public Trust Office report. Ho (Mr. Herdman) had made two statements in the Houso on two different occasions. From thoso statements ho had nothing to retract, and he wished to modify nothing in them. There wero two questions only in connection with the report. ' Tho first was whether the Minister nvas bound under any circumstances to lay upon tho tablo of tho Houso any document that came into his hands from tho head of a Department; and tho second was whether it was justifiable for any member of tho Public Service to Teveal to anybody outsido his office, or to any nowspaper, anything confidential pertaining to his office. Mr. Russell: Is tho Minister right in denying tho existence of the document?

Mr. Herdman: I did not do that. Mr. Russell: Oh, yes. You did. Mr. Herdman: Tlio honourable gontleman is quite wrong. Mr. Russell: I'm not wrong, and I will prove it to him. Mr. Herdman denied absolutely that I he had ever said thero was no report in existence. Ho said that the honourable gentleman and others had dono a great deal of harm to the Public Trust Offico. It should bo an institution of trust in which the people of New Zealand could have the utmost confidence. The member for Avon and his friends had done mote injury' to the Offico in assisting to destroy this confidence than 20 Commissions could possibly have dono. This report had como into his hands as Minister in Charge of the Offico. As ho had already pointed out it contained statements which related tp matters of policy, and it contained statements with which he did not agree. Ho maintained that lie had a right to say whether ho should tablo a document of that kind or not. The Minister, and the Minister alone, should bo responsible for making a statement of policy, for which he would be responsible to the House. The report referred to tho sinking funds of local bodies and their investment. What right had tho Public Trustee to make a. statement like that to the House without tho consent of his Minister? It was ridiculous, utterly absurd. There was also 'tho I question of the law work of tho Office. I The: Commissioners had reported that a considerable amount of reform should take placo in the legal work of tho office, and on behalf of the Government ho wished to say that thero was no intention of interfering with tho legitimate work of tho Public Trust Offico. The only desire of the Government was to see that tho legal work was properly and efficiently dono by tho officers under the Public Trustee. He also wished to.sa.v that ho accepted tho opinion of tho Commissioners rather than that of tho member for Avon or any other member of tho House.. The Commissioners were men of such ability tliat their opinion deserved the most serious consideration of the Government. It had been said that tho Government had been interfering with tho legal work of the offico. No Minister of tho Crown had dono anything of tho kind. Ho ropeated that no undor-sccrctary or head of a Department had any riglit to make a statement to tho Hnuso relating to matters of policy without tho consent of tho Minister. And it was to be deplored that there were men in the Public Service who did not scruplo to be dishonourable to gain an advantage for the opponents of the Government, who were their political friends. The question debate closed after Mr. Herdman sat down, owing to the time having elapsed. Mr. Russell asked to be allowed to make "a personal explanation," but he was not allowed to do so. PREMIUM BONDS, THK END OF TIIK BILL. At 0.3 p.m. the House went into Committee upon the Premium Bonds Validation Bill. llr. A. Harris (in oharno of tho Bill)

at once moved to report progress, and ask leave to sit again. This was agreed to. USING SUNLICHT. Mil. T. K. SIDEY'S BILL. The next Bill ou the list was Mr. T. K. Sidey's Definition of Time Bill. ilr. Sidoy, in tho courso of a brief statement, said that the Bill only proposed that the system should be tried during threo months. Mr. J. Bollard: Make it three days! Mr. Sidey begged members not to unduly delay tho Bill. Mr. G. V. Pearce said that it was not fair on tho part of city members to try to force this thing on the country. Let city people go to their - offices at 8 o'clock, instead of nine if they wanted to. Ho read a resolution passed by the directors of tho Joll Dairy Company, statingthat tho Bill was opposed to tlio interests of thoso engaged in the dairying industry. The executive of tho Taranaki Fanners' Union had also passed a resolution hostile to tho Bill. Mr. Pearce declared that if any member representing a dairy district voted for tho Bill he would never he scon in the House again. It would do tho Houso a great deal of harm to lose any of the Taranaki members and for that and other reasons ho would oppose the Bill. , , Mr. G. Laurenson supported the Bill, saying that with all due reverence for tho cow in Taranaki, there were other places in the Dominion than the dairying province. It W'as an utter_ impossibility to mako the Bill applicable only to the cities and not to the country districts. For one thing, it would upset railway time-tables. •After tho supper adjournment tho House settled down to what promised to bo a long discussion. Mr. A. Harris (Waitemata) heartily supported the Bill. Mr. J. B. Hino (Stratford) stated In plain terms that the Bill would meet the fate of its predecessors and urged the member in charge to withdraw it. Objections to tho Bill which Mr. -Hino had advanced wero answered in detail by Mr. H. Atmore (Nelson). Mr. Sidey Gives Way.

At 10.20 p.m. Mr,. Sidoy said that he did not want to-monopoliso tho last day allotted to private' members. Ho proposed that tho Houso should divide forthwith on the short title and that as soon as tho division had been taken, however tho verdict went, progress should bo reported. Sir Walter Buchanan said that ho hoped lion, members would not bo so blind to tho important interests involved as to agreo to the disingenuous proposal advanced by the member in charge of the Bill. Ho did not want to do anything unfair, but he had to protect the interests of his constituents. It was easy for city members to tell the country people what they ought to do, but country peoplo wore quite capable of forming an opinion for themselves. Mr." A. E. Glover supported the Bill.

Mr. Sidoy said that as tho member for Wairarapa seemed to think that some sinister motive lay behind his proposal (to take' a division) he would simply move to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Sir. G. V. Pearce objected to the motion. Ho contended that it was necessary that tho Bill should bo discussed in order that people might understand what the proposal was. Mr. Pearco elaborated his point at somo length.

Mr. A. 11. Hindmarsh raised a point of order. He said ho wanted an interpreter; ho could not understand tho English of the member for Patea.

Tho Chairman: There is no point of order.

Mr. Pearce: I am sorry for/ the hon. member. He is evidently more denso than I thought ho was. Ho does not understand English.

' Mr. H. M. Campbell also opposed tho proposal to report progress on the ground that it would limit discussion, but Mr. D. Buick urged members" to agreo to tho motion in order to kill tho Bill. Subsequently tho discussion became rather mixed- All sorts of points of order wero raised. Tho Chair Vacated. Meantime Mr. Sidey left the chair and returned to his bench. . Mr. W. Nosworthy directed tho Chairman's attention to the circumstance, but tho latter simply stated that it was open to any member to assume the vacated chair. Mr. T. Buxton contended that tho patent object of Government members was to avoid discussing another Bill. Mr. E. P. Lee said that Mr. Sidey should not bo allowed to injure his own cause. Mr. L. M. Isitt said that they had a right to expcct a vigorous protest from tho Primo Minister against the time-wasting -that was going ou, ' for somo. sinister motive. Mr. Sidey Resumes Chair. •

Mr. C. E. Statham said he was surprised to see the member for Dunedin South dropping his Bill. Ho had always supported tho Bill, and ho would vote for it that evening. Dr. A. K. Newman said he was amazed to see tho member drop what was certainly one of the most popular measures that was over before Parliament. He likened Mr. Sidey's action to that of Judas Iscariot.

Mr. W. H. D. Bell also urged that Mr. Sidey ought to "take the chair again. Mr. Sidey was prevailed upon to resume the chair at 11.2 p.m. He said tliat if members would stay with him ho would stay and put tho Bill through. He asked leave to withdraw his proposition to report progress. Several objections wero raised to the withdrawal, and tho mption, therefore, stood.

Mr. A. H. Hintlmarsh began to nttaelc the member for Waitemata and other members on tlie Governemtn side of tlio House. "As for the member for Waitemata," ho said, "he ougnt to bo sucking a bottle." The Dignity of the House. Mr. Malcolm: That language is not consonant with the dignity of the House, ami the honourable member must withdraw it. Mr. Hindmarsh: I meant a baby's bottle, sir. Mr. Malcolm: You must withdraw. Mr. Hindmarsh: Well, I'll withdraw "bottle." Mr. Mnlcblm told hjm again that ho must withdraw.

Sir. Hindmarsh: Very well, I'll withdraw "baby" and- say "political baby" • —that lie represents his constituents as a baby would. He then went on to refer to the "mental calibre" of certain members opposing tho Bill, and urged the Prime Minister to maintain the dignity of the-House, and not allow the House to be coerced by these members. Ho was cnllcd to order by Mr. Malcolm, who said lie must not continuo that line of Argument. He returned to tho attack, however, ami made use again of tho term "mental ealibro" without using the names of the members to whom he referred. Mr. Hindmarsh was again- called to order,, whereupon Mr. W. W. llussell moved that progress be reported in order that the opinion of the Speaker could be- taken 011 thu Chairman's ruling. Mr. Speafcor Sant For. No objection was offered to the motion by tho Government, and it was carried. When Mr. Speaker took the Chair, Mr. Malcolm said that the member for Wellington South had been, speaking in Committee on a motion to report progress on the Itill, and he had called the honourable member to order oil tho ground that he was irrelevant. Ho rc-fen-ecl Mr. Speaker to a_ ruling of Mr. Spoakor ftuiwioss h.v which it wu* <J<v.

tennincd that under, tho rules of pro- I cedurc the Chairman must decide as to whether tlicro was irrelevance, and the Speaker would not review tho <ioCfSroii.

.Mr. G. W. Russell (Avon) said that on the motion to report progress the member for Wellington South was addressing the lious'o, and in the course of his speech had referred to the mental calibre of certain members who had been opposing the Bill. Tho Chairman of Committees instructed the honourable member not to proceed ou those lines, but did not uso the word "irrelevance." He did not charge the honourable member with "tedious repetition," or with "continued irrelevance," which were tho expressions used in tlio Rules of Procedure. Thoso words were not mentioned. Tho honourable member went on and again referred to the mental calibre 'of members, but did not mention names or constituencies. The Chairman of Committees then called tho honourable member to order, and directed him not to proceed on thoso lines. Jt was ou tliis. ruling that ho (.Mr. Russell) had moved that Mr. Speaker's opinion be taken.

The rion. W. F. Massey (Primo Minister) said he did not think it was necessary that he should add to what tho member for Avon had said, because tlio member for Avon had proved the Chairman's case up to the hilt. It had been ruled again and again that when a motion to report progress was being discussed members must confine thcrnFolves to arguments for or against reporting progress. The member for Wellington South had referred to the mental calibre of certain members and tho Chairman ruled that in referring to members iu that way he was not speaking to the motion, and was not in order. He referred again to the mental calibre of members, and tho Chairman again iuled him out of order. It was tlieu that the member for Avon moved to report progress. Mr. Hindmarsh Explains. Mr. Hindmarsh said that the debate before ho spoke had drifted, and had covered a great deal of ground. )J» asked the i'rimo Minister to maintain tho dignity of the House, and referred to tlio 1 mental calibre —certainly he mentioned ono or two members ot tho Houso whom ho considered wero opposing tho senso of tho House. Ho was called to order, and desisted from mentioning names, but said that tho proceedings had been taken only by a few, and they wero of such a mental calibre as should not influence tho House, and again appealed to the Premier to maintain tlio dignity of the House by seeing that this small knot of men did not practically rule the House. He was called to order a second time. Tho Chairman gave no reason, but that iie had previously called him to order, and ordered him to sit down. Conflicting Opinions. The Hon. W. 11. Herrios said that they had always had a ruling from the Speaker that the Chairman was tho best judge as to when a member was irrelevant or wandered from tho subject. If they did not uphold tho Chairman as the best judge of what had taken placo, then it seemed to him that it would bo almost impossible to uphold tho dignity of tlio Chair.

Mr. G. Witty dissented from this view, contending that if tho position wero as stated by tbo Minister, thero would bo no right of appeal to tho Speaker.

Mr. Malcolm said that ho had not ordered Mr. Hindmarsh to resumo his seat, but had only asked him to discontinue a lino of argument. It was on account of irreloranco that ho ruled Mr. Hindmarsh out, though ho did not uso tlho term.

Mr. Russell said that it was clear from-tho ruling of Mr. Speaker Guinness which had boon quoted that a member could only bo asked to resumo his seat on tho ground of irrelevanco cr tedious repetition. Speaker Not the Judge. Mr. Speaker said that in Committee of tho Whole, debate on tho question of reporting progress must bo confined to tlio' matter of tho motion. In such a debate tho Chairman decided as to whether thero was irrelevance or repetition, and tho Speaker could not review his decision. It was absolutely clear that it was not his function, as Speaker, to act as judge on tho present occasion. It was not for him to say whether tho Chairman of Committees was right or otherwise. On this occasion it was a case of "Tho Chairman decides and'tlio Speaker will not review his dc-cision." A Proposal Rejected. The Primo Minister said it was clear that the Houso was not in a working humour. He suggested that progress should be reported upon private Bills and an hour spent upon some local Bill.

Mr. J. Payne objected strongly to reporting progress. He understood that this was tho last'opportunity-that private Bills would have of being considered. Mr. Massey: "Yes. Mr. Malcolm, 1 havo had enough of this. Mr. Hindmarsh urged tho Houso to insist upon going to a vote on tho Bill. Tho motion to report progress went to a division at 1.47 p.m., and was defeated by 38 votes to 25. Killing the Bill. Mr. G. V. Pearce moved an amendment to change tho short title of "Definition of Time Bill'" to • "Daylight Saving for tho Purposes of Sport Bill." He did this, he said, to show tho public of New Zealand that Parliament was askod to legislate in tho interests of sport, as against tho interests of the primary industries of the country.

The amendment was lost *5n the voices after half an hour's debate. It had been arranged, on the suggestion of Mr. W. H. 1). Bell, that the amendment should be disposed of, and that then the Committee would go to a division on the short title, on the understanding that Mr.' Sidey would give an assurance that he would move to report progress after the division. Mr. Sidey gave tho assurance, and- opponents of the Bill did not prolong the debate farther. The bells were rung, but 110 division was called, and the short title clause was agreed to on tho voices. Mr. Sidey then moved to report progress, but Mr. T. H. Davey, a supporter of tho Bill, called a division. Tho motion to report progress was carried by 32 votes to 27. It wns then 0.13 a.m. MORE OBJECTIONS.

DISTRESS FOR RENT BILL,

Then another difficulty was raised, when it was proposed that Mr. Malcolm should report that no progress had been reported on the other Bills, on which the House had gone into. Committee. Mr. Malcolm therefore agreed to tako tlm motions to report progress on the Bills separately. Tho first Bill was tho Distress Limitation Bill, raid tho motion to report tliat no progress had been made on this Bill was opposed. Tho effect of this Bill is to increase the value of chattels to be exempted from distress for rent from £25 to £50. A Tie Division. At 1.15 a division was taken oil the motion that progress be reported. Tho voting was—Ayes 28. noes 28, and the Chairman, in accordance with custom, gave his vote to give the Bill another chance, and progress was not reported. The Hon. \V.~F. Massey (Prime Minister) said lie had had a friendly feeling towards the Bill, but. ho would not be coerced into taking it up, as members had attempted to coerce him that evening. lie had never been approached to take up the Bill, but lie had thought ot asking the Attorney-General to ex--1 amino t&'o Bill to aoo whetlior it was a

proper Bill to tako up. Ho reminded members that to put tlio Bill through Committee that evening did not mean that it would go on the Statute Book.

.After some further discussion, tho short title was passed, and the Hon. W. H. Herries moved to report progress. Tho motion was carried. BETTERMENT BILL A similar motion was carried without a discussion regarding tho Betterment Bill. COMMERCIAL TRUSTS BILL. ANOTHER TIE DIVISION. Another discussion arose upon tho Commercial Trusts Amendment Bill (Mr Pnyne). A\ hen tho Hon. W. H. Hcrrie.s moved to report progress tho voting was again a tic, being: "Ayes." 27; "Noes," 27. Messrs. Hine, Wilkinson, and Svkes voted with the "Noes." Tho Chairman said that as it was five .minutes to 2 o'clock ho thought he should 1 be justified in giving his voto with tho "ayes" and declaring that progress was reported. When tho Bills were reported, 'Mr. Payne addressed a question to tho Speaker regarding the casting vote of the Cliairman of Committees. Mr. Speaker said that the Chairman's vote w r as entirely a matter for ihimself. Mr. Russell .sought to put the circumstances of tho 071 record. Mr. H'erries asked whether this was iu order. Mr. Speaker ruled that the only subject that could bo- discussed at that stage was tho motion that the House should again, on next sitting day, resolvo itself , into Committee. Tho voting of tho Chairman therefore could not bo brought un. Mr. Russell again asked, leave to deal withi tho subject of tho vote, but was ■ruled out of order. Tho formal motion that the House resolve itself into Committee on next sit-ting-day was agreed to, and tho House roso at 2.7 a.m.