THE HOUSE

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2520, 22 July 1915, Page 7

THE HOUSE

The House-of Representatives sat at 5.30 p.m. , ; Mr. R. A: .WRIGHT (Wellington Suburbs) gave: notice : of ; the Karon iWater Supply and - Sanitation Bill. _ The" Devon port Borough Vesting Bill ' (Mr. A. Harris) was read a second time.

■ MOTIONS FOR RETURNS. Mr.l J. T. M. HORNSBY (Wairarapa) •/Jtaoved for a return showing sums paid { las salary/ travelling allowances, or other ('expenses to Mr. F. M-. B. Fisher sub(sequent to December 10, 1914, upon ■which date ho ceased to be a member of (Parliament-. . . „ The Right Hon;: W.:F. MASSEY said lie would have pleasure in supplying the retumj hilt he thought' that' when the honourable member received it. he would find'-it marked-:"nil." The-motion'was carried. : • ■ l Mr. T. A. H.- FIELD (Nelson) moved"; W'That there be laid.beforo.the House, a i Totrnrn showing the number of men cn ■ the strength at Trentham Camp who have been discharged as medioally ur.fit /since March 31 last, and the dates, of their discharge." • The motion was .carried.

STATE FIRE OFFICE, OLD QUESTION' REVIVED. . v .' Mfi T. M. AVILFORD (Hutt) -moved'the' second leading of the Stat© . Advances Amendment Bill; Ho explained the effect of the Bill, ivhich -was to reintroduce a-repealed clause relating to the ■ lof moneys - from one branch >of the funds to anothor, when there was no immediate need for the moneys !in -their own branch. These, transfers ' 1 i might' be made: onthe authority- of - the- ■ VMinister/;;but.'tha.. repayment niust be Pimade as'soon as practicable; ,>The clause -! repealed,'- which he wished to navo rein- : (sorted--in- the Act, required tho Min--ast»r-< to inform the House of. tho • j.transfers- of money from one branch of !■,the fund to the other; immediately these -''transfers were made. .The->only - other ('clause in the Bill was intended to com- . -' rpel mortgagors: borrowing money, - from' i'the State Advances Departttent to in- ■ /sure any-buildings pledged as security '-for tho loan in the State Fire Office. .This had formerly been the.law,.but'.the[Finance -Minister, had ; left : to)theiinor(r ;. Vgagor the choice': of ;insuriiig -with'othcr. • reputable offices.- , tThe" Right Hon. -W. F. MASSEY *raised' a" point of. ordcry that -.the Bill, ! 'which.Jdealt'. with revenue; "was. one that, private member was not competent to introduce. - af - Mr. SPEAKER said ho would consult . the Standing Orders on the question. In any/case it was not necessary , to stop thfe Bill at the second reading. A later opportunity would occur,' - -

possible Hardship. The Hon. J. ALLEN said that the ob-jection-to giving the House, information,, as to tie transferswas. that they occurred sometimes with. great frequency, ■ and he could-not see that returns would 1 'give any real information to the House at all. As to the other - there were many reasons: wily it should not bo inserted. Ono of the reasons was that-if-the compulsion were .imposed Upon' mortgagors to insuro with the - State, compulsion would . be imposed upon the State Office to: take these . risks: i-This might be irksome, even disastrous, audit was a', condition,thai; no insurance company would impose or aci cept. Further, ho did not agree' tho State Offico should attempt to destroy : all competitors. ' Its object, was achieved if ■ it regulated insurance rates., The ' compulsion would operate' as a hardship : to iarmors who would not . then be allowed to insure in the . offices they had / set up with their own money. V SIR JOSEPH WARD (Awaiu'a) referred to the fact that when the State Fire Insurance Department was inaugurated there was a. lowering of rates by other companies to shut the State out. There was no doubt .the State. Insurance,. De- " j partment.had effected a. great saying to the people of tho country—it was not set Hip ■ to ■ wipe out other companies, but rather to regulate the charges: He be- • lieved the State Department had also | done good to the mutual companies. He held that the circular compelling: bor- \ rowers from the State to effect insur!anco :with' tie State Cffico was ; good. ■ (Further, he held the Minister 'should (give -a. cleari statement as ' to money (transferred from one Department to an- ' other. • . ! 5 Mr. A. S. MALCOLM (Clutha) said : that a party seemed to be growing up in the House anxious.to, seo: tho State Office adopt a tyrannical attitude objected ■ to in the past by tho private companies. He stood for freedom in t-nis matter, to : allow .the mutual companies to. get support from their members He stood for I State enterprise, but by doing as was j asked they would get the State enterr pfise disliked. The.State'sfcduld not be allowed to take the individual, who had borrowed money from the Government, : by tho throat, and tyrannically compel him to do other business with tho State. ' Interests of Farmers. • Mr. G. V". PEARCE (Patea) said that j the fact that the; State Office had shown I a bigger increase since ther present Government came into power than ever •jt did. before , was proof enough that the Government was not desirous .• of • (killing .the State Office. The rank and '£16 seemed desirous of attacking the 'farmers, and he was out . to defend fthem. • Co-operative concerns would be (killed if compulsion was lised in this , jnatter—-it' would kill the Taranaki company. ' |.:Mr. A. H. HINDMARSH (Wellington 'South) said that the farmers wero "pampered," and no one objected to that, but he' thought they should attempt ■ to repay that by , instructing their representatives to - support anything for the good of tho State. He asked hon. members if, they had any patriotism in this time of danger to rally round the State and ensuro that their coffers should be kept full—esipecially as it was not going , to cost i more to anyone. Mr./W.' A. VEITCH (Wanganui) said that if the Farmers' Mutual Companies could offer better terms than the Stato Office, then the Minister should isoe. to it that" the State Office rates' were reviewed to discover a-a to whether they could not be reduced to a level .which' would enable the Stato to oom-

pete on level terms with the" mutual associations.

'Mr. J. B. HINE (Stratford) said he was sorry that the member for Hutt had confused 'issues by putting two dissimilar clauses in the Bill. His opinion about the question relating to the State Fire Offico was that borrowers from the State should be compelled to insure property in the State Office. _ Mr. L. M. ISITT (Cliristchurch North) said that all other lending institutions. insisted upon insurances ing effected on properties mortgaged in certain, firo offices.. He argued that the State."should do the same thing. Mi\ T. A. H. FIELD (Nelson) said tliafcin liis experience it was not the custom of .private lending institutions, such as building-societies', to insist upon borrowers insuring in any particular office. He did not think the State should do anything of the sort. Mr. 0. A. WILKINSON (Egmont) defended the Mutual Associations from the attacks made upon them. He. did not think the State Offico was doing what it should do. The rates had not been reduced for eleven years. In one town in his electorate a water , supply had been put lin, ; an efficient lire brigade established, and electric light put Hi, but the rates were not reduced. . If the State Office washed to compete with Mutual Fire Assurance Associations it should do so, not by compulsion, but by reducing rates.- He strongly advocated the extension of the- activities of the State Office. •

State Fire Increases. The Right Hon. W. F. MASSEY (Puma Minister) said that-ho was not, buppoi tm'g the Bill as a whole because it seemed to him ■ it aimed at bringing about a monopoly—-and a State monopoly was just as' bad as any other sort of monopoly. .. It would be a very imi proper thing, 1 if/it became necessary for t tho .Government to. borrow money from an insurance company, if that compelled them to do all their insurance business with that company. Then there was. the point of the mutual insurance companies, in which lie took some interest. ,- He took pride in the fact that the, Bill providing-for that mutual insurance had stood the test of time in New Zealand. It had also had t-ho effect of reducing the rates on isolated risks, and' in a time like'this .the; fact should be remembered. He also. said that the .State Office had done good, but that should not make them overlook what had been done by the mutual; companies, which could do business with: their members at an even lower rate than the State Office. The capital of those companies depended not so much on the money they had, but on the capital of the men behind thorn. Ho did not thiuk it would be justice to the. farmers to compel them to leave their, own companies and insure' with the State It had been inferred that afternoon that the. Government, had mismanaged tho State Department.-: He agreed with the suggestion that, the Stato Departments should go even further, and, onter into competition, with other concerns. ' A member: You have, got your opportunity now,. Mr. Massey: "It is quite on tho cards that the opportunity will be availed of." He thought it proper that the Stat® should go into competition with any 7 company attempting a monopoly, Mr. Russell: You are becoming quite' a good Liberal. '(Laughter.) -\ ; Mr. . Massey-: The honourable gentleman is just discovering it. The people of this country discovered it a good many years ago. Mr. Massey, went on to show, how i the State Office had prospered since his party came into office, and quoted from i the . report for the year- ending. December,* 1914, in .which the .manager "said that the year had ; been the most successful experienced in the - history of the office. 'The profits for the last:five years were: l910 j: i£848Z; 191-iyv£o39l rs 1912 (the Reform'-Party's firstiiyear);£14,023; 1913, £16,443; and 1914 £18,660. He thought that showed a good rocord, - which roilected - credit -on the . management. As far as the provision went-for making, a return of transfers from one Department to.another, which was embodied in the Bill before the House, he had no objections. He could not say why the alteration should have been made.

Attack Private Monopolies. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL , (Avon) said that the State Fire Insurance legislation was put on the Statutes in the face of the bitterest opposition from the Reform members. If-the Prime' Minister would utilise the State Office to make a vigorous attack upon outside companies he would have the support of the Opposition members, but ,no contended the figures quoted indicated, that the State : Fire Office had ceased for the time its function of forcing down the rates. He took it from the remarks made by Mr. Massey that a campaign would be shortly undertaken by the State Office against the existing private companies. His opinion had been - that the State Office had stepped into line with the ordinary insurance companies. A. member: It has been connected with the ring for years: ( . Mr.-lt'ussell: That is. my opinion. ; The Prime Minister assured Mr. Russell that he would not oppose the second reading of the Bill, r The. Hon. W. H. HERMES (Minister of Railways) said that the answer to the old election "claptrap" that the Reform Government t was trying to . ruin tho State enterprises was in the balancesheets, which showed an advance on the control under the previous Administration. He supported the State Fire Insurance, but there were reasons why compulsory insurance should not be imposed. Tne general feeling of country settlers was that whatever commission was paid should go to tho agents in tli'eir districts. -There was no doubt that local prejudice was a big factor against compelling insurance with the State Office.

Mr. G. WITTY (Riccarton) said that the reason the farmed insured in the mutual "companies was because they were shareholders, and were therefore creating a monopoly. • Apart from this matter, Mr. Witty contended that there should be no charge made when a man applied for a. Stato advance. He instanced a case where a man was charged £2 10s. by a lawyer wheii he applied for an advance bf £100, which he failed to got. Mr. A. HARRIS (Waitemata) thought that, the Government should not throw away a chance of coming into fair competition with the private enterprises. He could show that they compelled borrowers to'insure with the office which lent the money.

. Dr. THAOKER (Christchurch East) supported the . Bill because he held it would bring "golden swereigns" into the coffers of the Dominion. This should be encouraged, especially in this time of national stress.

Mr. T. W. RHODES (Thames) held that the State could take all the risks now offering at a lower rate, and still make a profit. Mr. H. G. ELL (Christchurch South) accused the Minister of a dereliction of duty in not putting all the business that he could through the Stato office. Bill Read a Second Time. The Bill was Tead a second time on the voices. INDUSTRIAL UNIONS BILL. Mr. J. M'COMBS (Lyttelton) moved the second reading, pro forma, of the industrial Unions and Trade Unions Enabling. Bill. . : The Bill was read a second time pro forma, and referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. The House rcsc at 11.20 p.m.

Mary is the commonest name for women in Englaid, William the commonest name for men. Woods' Great Peppermint GutPi For Couelm and Colds b«t© fails. la, 6d*