THE HOUSE

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2298, 4 November 1914, Page 6

THE HOUSE

THE COAL MINES BILL HUNTLY DISASTER MR/MASSEY, ASKS QUESTIONS WHY NO INSPECTOR?. ' After The Dominion went to'press yesterday morning', the Coal Mines Amendment Bill was read a second time on the voices. ' In Committee on the Bill, The Prime Minister said that the member for Grey had said that Mr. Reed had thoroughly inspected the State Coal Mines— (Mr. Webb assented) —Mr. Reed was aware'of the .danger that existed at Huntly for,many months _ before the .'accident' happened. Why did he not inspect the Huntly mines? He was an inspector of mines, and he had a right to go down any* mine in any part of , NeV Zealand. '.'This is. what is incomprehensible to me," continued the Prime Minister. "He (Mr. Reed) has stated plainly that ho was aware of the danger'at Huntly for several months before tho accident occurred. He actually,, in one statement, spoke about the possibility of a holocaust. Then why, in Heaven's name —knowing the danger of the mine— why didn't ho go to the mine and,order-:—

Mr.Wilford: He advised the UnderSecretary six times.

Mr. Massey: If I were Inspector of Mines, and anyone called my attention to; the dangerous state of a' mine, I would make it my business to be at that mine, and see if there was danger, and, if possible, take precautions to avert it. Why didn't he do itP Mr. Wilford: Because he has'no definite duties. . ■ '.

, Mr. Massey: A man in that position should know his duty and do it. Mr. Wilford: He reported to. the Un-der-Secretary. ' ' 'i. / . ■ Mr. Ma6soy: But surely he should have gone to the ■ mine and seen, for himself the condition ,of things., We have it from honourable members that he goes to other mines. Why did he- nob go to Huntly? There is something that requires to be explained. . I have never heard of a similar case.-.'--

: "What Does He Do?" Mr. Wilford said thai Mr. Reed had no po'iver to order anything to bo done. All executive authority of that kind was exercised by. the district • inspector,' Mr. ■ Bennie. If Mr.; ; Eeedhad gone: down .the mine to inspect it this would have made no difference. ; :. ■'■'Mr.,Allen: Wouldn't it! .'", '.■. ■ Mr. Wilford: No,-it wouldn't.,/' Mr. Massey: Does, he ever go down a mine?,' What does he do?' : ' Mr. Wilford:'l will tell you'what he it , does. . He writes' the Mines Report which Parliament passes without a,word ■■ of alteration., He went on to enumerate Mr. Reed's qualifications for- his 'post ami to describe his'fearless devch tion to'duty. .._ - ■ Mr. Massey.; said it' was incomprehensible that Mr. Reed should not have gone down the Huntly mine for .three years.: ■, .•-■■.'.■•. ■:■ Mr. Wilford: Has he any power to go down? ■'• Ask the Under-Secretary. Mr. Massey addressed' the questionto the Minister, and -.•■ •'••:.■ '• ... Mr. Fraser replied: Yes, certainly he has.J.X - : ; ■•■■ ■■••:'■■' An Interlude. Mr. Massey said he was in no way at enmity with Mr. Reed. He did not even know Mr. Reed, and'it was incorrect for honourable members to, suggest' that he' had any feeling in the matter. A Government member: They Want to make political capital out of it. . Mr. Isitt: No,' we don't.' , Mr. Nosworthy: Some, of you do, anyhow. I. have been told lit is one of the planks of your ■" platform. • Mr. Malcolm: I think this is degenerating into a conversation. I must ask honourable members not to interjects : ' : ;''■ •.'•''■ Mr. Wilford: It. is all due, to the member for Ashburton. He is so unfair. Government' members: Order, order. •Mir. Wilford:-Wow I Wow! x .., : Mr. Malcolm: Order: I cannptallow aii honourable member to use an'expression like that:. Mr. Wilford: If they call'out at me I will-reply to them every time. Even Daisy over there. '/ Mr. R! H. Rhodes: Little puppy dog. . ,'Mr: It's'all right Daisy.. ■ Mr. R. H. Rhodes: Poor, little puppy' dog. ■'. . •■'•,•■■.'■•''. ■-.''•'■ Mr. Malcolm: I have:on; several oocasioiis called honourable .members to order. I, must ask them not to make these interjections: - . . Mr. Massey": I think it is time the session came to an ! ,end if they can't - conduct themselves better than this. -/;. A minute later Mr.; Witty interjected, "Somebody'will be on his trial." Mr. Massey: I-hope somebody will be on'his trial beforo many days: The Bill was reported, with amendments. . '.'•••• ■'■' ■;•■ : r ]: . f •:■ . ■ On the third reading,. ■ Mr. T. -M. WILFORD' (Hutt) said he could not understand why the manager of the mine had not been arrested within, six hours after the-report was presented. He admitted, of course, that the major charge could be sustained. - ' ■ «.'-; •■',.-■-, Mr.'Fraser: You-have heard what has been done. It has" been referred . to the Crown' Law Office.. ; ;.-.• "* Mr. Wilford: I wouldn't refer it to the Crown Law Office. ' '•■' '■■ Mr. Fraser: If you were a Minister,- '.' you would. ' '■. ■ Mr. Wilford contended that the acci- '..' deiit was caused by the failure of 'jhe.'.' company to have the mine inspected. The Commission had found the company guilty of every fault.it was- possible to make, and yet the manager went free. The Hon. W. FRASERsaid the hoh. member for Hutt had tried -to fasten . the, responsibility for the disaster on' to the, Government. The scheme was quite obvious. It was an attempt to make political capital out of a deplor-. able accident.' It was not correct to say, as members of: the Opposition had said', that if the Bill of 1912 had been passed, this accident would not have occurred. The'fact was, and the Commission had agreed, that the Government had power under the; present law to, insist upon thei proper ; being taken for safety. . ; ' ■'"■'■-.' . The Bill was read a' thirdHimo, and; passed. .. '''•'.; "';.".'■.

COMMISSION'S REPORT. The adjourned dctiate cm the report of tho Royal Commission oh the Huntly -accident I 'was'concluded.;: . .. Mr. P. 0. WEBB asked -.whether the Government would pxtend.- the/ iscoge o|:

the Commission's inquiry to enable it to report • on'the ■ charges of victimisation, being made' agamst the, Huntly companies. He also asked whether the Government- would take steps to protect the workmen's' inspectors. ' The Eight' Hon. W.I'iJUSSEY: Tho" honourable gentleman should remember'this- ,1 understand there is one individual who wiU probably be on his trial for manslaughter, and he must know that it. would be very unfair; to have an independent inquiry-going on at the same time as .the trial. Continuing, he said_ that he was wholly opposed to anything in the way of victimisation, and he would do everything in ! his power to prevent it. "-/ -Mr. J. ROBERTSON (Otaki) said the disaster was the ;direot' result of the forc'l'-tionof tho bogus,unions, and the poli-;; of victimisation followed by the em; rers in'dealing with those' unions, lii-j motion .that the report lie on the'sable/was agreed to. , Tie House rose at 4.25.a.m.