PARLIAMENT

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2781, 27 May 1916, Page 8

PARLIAMENT

WAR PENSIONS \ ! « FINAL STAGES OF THE BILL THE PARTY ELEMENT The House of Bsprbsentatives met ot 2.30 p.m. Leave-of absence forsix days was granted to Mr. J. H. Escott (Pahiatua) on account of serious illness. The Expiring Laws Continuance Bill was introduced and .read a first time. The Hon. .T. ALLEN moved that the War Pensions Amendment Bill be recommitted in order to reconsider the new clause relating to applicants of notoriously bad character. He said that a new clause had been drawn to givo the magistrate power to make inquiries into such cases, but the Pensions Board did not think this proposal a good one. If the Committee would not accept the clause as it had been pnt in the Bill, he would have the whole clause struck out. Ho moved that this be done,. giving at the same time an undertaking, that a suitable clause would be drafted and inserted iu the Bill in the Upper House. The citiui'.e was strucTc wit. On the third reading, Mr. J. Payne, Mr. W. A. Veitch, Mr. T. M. Wilford, Mr. G. Witty. Mr. A. Walker, Mr. A. H. ITindmarsh. My. A. Harris, anil Jlr. J. M'Combs spoke in the debate. All save Mr. Harris made attacks on the Bill, aud on the Government which was the author of it. The member for Lyttotton directed his attack on Sir Joseph Ward. The complaint generally was "that the pensions were not) big enough, that the Government should make more adequate provision for children, and that in order to raise the necessary money the Government should take from the wealthy people sufficient of their wealth by taxation, and especially by taxation "of war profits, to provide moro adequate pensions. ■ Prime Minister Protests. The Bight Hon. W. F. MASSEY said that much misrepresentation had come from a band of in the House. Ho reforred first of all to the attacks upon Sir Joseph Ward, who, because he was unwell, was unable to be present. In past years it was the custom of, the House to refrain from attacking a Minister or a member under such circumstances. Ho did not need to defend Sir Joseph Ward, because Kir Joseph Ward could defend himself quite well inside or outside the House. Bu.t since Sir Joseph Waril had been his colleague, since the war began, he had conducted himself like a British citizen, a New Zenlander, and a patriot. (Hear, hear.) Members had said that the; Government had in granting the extra half-crown to children merely yielded to pressure from those in opposition to the Bill. This was not the fact. The first members to speak to him about the question at all were some who had been very closely as'sociated with him in politics for . maiiy years. He would not discuss who was the member of the Government who had first made tho suggestion to Cabinet. The member for Wellington South had mads a speech which was full of pathos—or was it bathos? He reminded that honourable member of tho spceoh he had made Inst year on the Bill, in which ho had given to the House a. most serious warning in the gravest terms. This year ho i kuew uo caution. Last year he had deplored the introduction of party into tho discussion ou tho Bill; because he feared it might do harm to the soldiers. This year he clamoured for party. Last year the honourable member was on. the Defence Committee, and ho defended the committee against the charges made against it of niggardly treatment of soldiers. Tho committee, as he said, did not know what bad times would como iu the wake of tho war, aud had to exercise caution. No ono could say theu what tho stato of things would be iii two years. Au honourable member: That holds good now. .

Mr. Mii>>ey #a{il iliat tho honourablo 1 member had chauged his attitudo in a remarkable way. The speech of the honourable member was a striking instance of cant ami humbug. Mr. M'Combs had said that the Government by its treatment of soldiers had discouraged recruiting. But who had encouraged recruiting? Ho had never beard' of anything in this way being done by Mr. M'Combs. Mr. Massey, defending the liill, said it was tho best pensions measure that had been produced by any of the British Dominions, and 110 claimed that it must be in fact a very good measure. He detailed some of the improvements made in the Act by the amending Bill then before tho House. But lio repeated previous warnings that -we did not know when tho vrtu' would end. Ho would not say that it would end a year from now; ho rather thought it would go 011 "for ,n long time yet. Ho remonstrated wilti thoso moiftbiiro who had not. given tho National Government fair play. On tho other hand ho expressed satisfaction with the attitude shown by the supporters of tho National Government, thoso members who on both sides of tho Houso supported the National Government for putriotlo reasons iu this tjinn rf cvisls. Labour Members* Mr. HINDMARSH, in personal explanation, said that'last year the Ho'use did not realise that : many married men would go, but now married men would bo compelled to go. Also we had had a year's experience cf trade .and prices.. For these reasons he had seen fit. to change his rniud somewhat. \ . ' Mr. M'COMBS said that he had not known of Sir Joseph WurdV Hlnew, . >!<• claimed that 110 had assisted, recruiting, becauso lip, with others, had been mainly responsible for raising the pension for disabled men. from 255. to 355. All lion, member: Did you ever addresu a recruiting unolhijf? Mr. M'Combs: It is finite true that I did not address a recruiting meeting. -.1 did not feel that I should call upon'mcn to go at as. a day when 1 knew ,they would volunteer spontaneously if the 'country would, do l.be right tiling by them. (Cries of "Oh!") . ' Mr. P. C. WEBB (Grey) found fault with the Hill, 1 •Mr. J. T. M. HORNSBT' (Wairarapu) made a protest against the continuous sordid talk of money, tho attempt, as it seemed, lo measure tho people's and Parliament's patriotism iu money. He defended the Government 011 'general grounds, although be did not say that in the Bill we' wer'o making adequate provision for our soldiers. We Sh&ll Do More, Dr, A. K. NEWMA3T (Wellington East) also protested against tho habit of members in the House of girding at people with money. They did not all deserve the reproach of selfishness. If tho Government asked for more taxation 'they would willingly pay more. As Mr. Forbes had said, they were in a heroic mood. Nobody knew what slate of affairs would ccmo after the war; there might be general desolation and hardship, and for this reason he approved of a policy of caution. He would have preferred to see n bigger allowance to children, however. Bu'tJfcw Zealand was not only providing pensions, but land for soldiers. And after the war more iind more land.■would be piovidocl. H» believed that if the war . should happily end liefi/re tho enfl of this vear very literal provision for soldiers ard their dependants wfcnld bo possible, and it would" be made. He ventured to wiy that wo should, out of our gratitude to tho men who had fought, put up • « record such as 110 other country had done to provide properly for them, so that they should bo as well looked after as 'before thej went awov.

Minister in Reply. Tho Hon. J. ALLEN, in reply, said it was apparent that some members in the House were trying to use the Bill for political purposes, .to create a parly spirit. lie ili'd not accept the statement that tho amount of pensions granted had hud any appreciable effect upon recruiting. Rather, lie believed that every man who went to the front went not with any thought of money, but with thought only of his country and the Empire. (Hear, hear.) Ho deprecated . tho incorrect statements that had been made that the pensions and allowances granted in England were better than those granted in New Zealand; The English Act fixed a of .£:! for ths tnt.i.i amount of pen-

sioii, however large the number of children might be. This the member for lu'ey Lynn had omitted to state. If the English scheme were adopted in its' entirety, then the poor soldier would be worse oil than ,he would be under our scheme. The widow or an agricultural labourer, with two children, would receive in England 18s. (id. per week; in 2vew Zealand she would receive ,£2 per week. He would also remind "honourable members that in New Zealand education for children was free; in England it was not. It was not patriotic ful" any man at this time to advocate a ]>c-Jisio)is scheme which he knew must eventually tail. It would be a breach of contract to offer 155., a week to children, if we were to find after a few years that we would have to reduce it to 7a. a week. What New Zealand now promised sho would pay. If our finances allowed in future, slie would pay more. Replying to Mr. Witty, ho defended the men on the hospital ships from the charge that they were virtually guilty of cowardice because, being fit men, they should-be at the front, .and not hiding in safety on a hospital ship. Mr. Allen took strong exception to this statement, and as lis regarded it as his duty to defend every soldier against charges made, he hastened to meet, this charge. Men for service on the hospital ships had to pass exactly the same medical test .as for other services.

Mr. AYiity: They are fit men, and they ought to be at the front.

Sir. Allen: They are mighty near the front, and they run considerable risks. In conclusion, he expressed a hope that the Bill would pass in the cour.se of a few days.

The Bill was read a third time on the voices. , The House toso at 9.57 p.m.