THE'PRIVILEGES OF MEMBERS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2829, 21 July 1916, Page 6

THE'PRIVILEGES OF MEMBERS

TALK ABOUT A RAILWAY CONCESSION. , » Considerable discussion occurred in the House yesterday afternoon upon a. question asked by Mr. L. M. Isitt (Christcliuirch North). This question; addressed to the Minister of Railways, was: "Whither it is true that a railway ticket at reduced <fare from Napier to Wellington was on July 11 issued' to a married gentleman of \bout fifty years of ago on the ground that'the said gentleman is the son of a member'of the Legislature) and whether the father of tho said gentleman signed the necessary application certificate?" ■ /?, "Pfr. Mr - W. H. Berries (Minister of Railways) said: "A railway ticket at reduced rate from Napier to Wellington was issued to the son of a membor of the Legislature on July 11. This is in accordance with • the regulations of the Railway Department and the, arrangements that nave been in operation for very many years. There is no age restriction in so far as tho 'concession to,sons or. daughters of the members of the Legislature is concerned. In the case in question the gentleman presented, tho usual certificate signed by his father, and was given the concession to which he was entitled."

Mr. A. H. Hindmarsh, (Wellington South) said he desired to refer to this question. This act was performed by one of the wealthiest men in the country Mr. Wilford: Who was it? Mr. Hindmarsh: Young Ormand. Jlr. Wilford: Oh,'impossible. Mr. Hindmarsh: Yes, and I think his name ought to be published throughout New Zealand. I think it is the duty of every member of Parliament when ho seesa gross abuse of privilege to call attention to it. Mr. Hindmarsh proceeded to refer to the matter in strong terms, being twice called to order for easting reflections on a member of another branch of the Legislature. Mr. J. V. Brown (Napier), referring to the same question, said lie did not think any other member of the House than Mr. Isitt would have asked such a question. He liked to meet sports, and he did not think such a- question ts this should, have been asked. '

■ Jlr. L. M. Isitt said that ho had hesitated. some little time before ho aslicd this question, but it seemed to bo such a gross departure from at all.events llio spirit, if not the law, of the concession, that he regarded it as his duty to'bring it before the .House. ' He had always fought that the concession was simply provided for a man who brought his daughter or wife with hiiu to the session. He deemed it his' duty to bring the matter before the House, and personally ho hoped that some Steps would be 'taken to 1 limit this conccssion for the futur.e. The Minister of Railways .(the Hon. W. H. Herries) said he would not like it to go about that anything extraordinary was dono in this case by the Railway Department. No favour had been shown to this gentleman referred to—it was an ordinary privilege open- to any member, of the Legislature. At the "beginning of every session a circular was sent to every member stating that free passes for "the wives of members would be issued over tho railway, to be available (for ono month after the session. In addition, return tickets at singto fares or single tickets at half fares would be issued to ■unmarried daughters and unmarried sons of members of the legislature for the purpose of visiting Wellington dr.iing the session. A member of the Legislature had signed this requisition, and all requirements were carried, out. He quite agreed with the member for Christchurcli North that this concession was not; intended for such cases as were alluded to in the question, but it was very oiffieult to lay down conditions which were not open to. some abuse. Ho could only leavo it to the good taste of members as to when the conccssion should be used. He regretted that the quest inn asked ill 'the House. It would have bien far better for the member'for Ohristchurch North to have come to him, and not give, all this publicity to the matter. (Heai', hoar.)