PARLIAMENT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 38, 8 November 1918, Page 7

PARLIAMENT

DEFENCE MATTERS SIR JAMES ALLAN REPLIES TO CRITICS f THE HOUSE ;Tho House of Representatives wet at 2.;i0 p.m. NEW PROTECTION. llr. E. M'G'ALLUM OVnirau) moved for leave to introduce the New Protection Bill. Ho said it was true that tho fanners had done fairly well during the war. But tho people who were making tho most money were tho manufacturers. . The manufacturer was entitled to a fair profit, and he had always had the 'assistance of the Legislature in this respect. Tho worker should have a fair return for his labour, and there again tho legislature had acted. But there was a third party to a protective tariff. That third party'was tho consumer, and tljo idea .underlying the Bill was to give tho Board of Trade power to protect the consumer. The board was to investigate and fix maximum selling prices at a fair level. The penalty to bo imposed on'the manufacturer if he exceeded that price was to be the payment of duty on the. same sealers if lie were an importer. In other words, the manufacturer could not enjoy the benefit of'the protective duty unless.ho,sold at a fair price- fixed by the Board of Trade. A similar Bill had been introduced in Australin. and had been upset by tho Courts ongrounds that would- not exist in New Zealand. The proposal would do much to lift the burden at present- imposed upon tho consumers by the high cost ,of living, and ho hoped that tho Government would 'take it. up. The Bill was introduced and ..read, a first time.

' ! WAR' LEGISLATION. The War Legislation Amendment Bill was introduced by Governor-General's Message and read a first time., . MILITARY DECORATIONS, The Military' Decorations and Distinctive Badges Bill was'-introduced by tlie Minister of Defence, -aiid; read. a. first time. "■.'•■.•,- / DEFENCE "teXPENDITURE THE COMMISSION'S REPORT - .„__\ . - :' ' SOME CRITICISM ( .The report-of the Defence Expenditure .Commission, with a memorandum by ■the Minister- of. Defence and notes of a conference of officers, was presented • to the House by the Minister, who said .that the evidence taken by the commis-sion'would'be'laid.-iipon tlie table. Mr. W. A. VEITCH (W.niiganui) said that Lord Kitchener's defence schenio for New Zealand had made tho group system the basis of the whole - structure. It would bo interesting to know why, ;u time of wai'i the Minister of Defence had gone past the groups and set up two great; central'cainj)3 for the training of recruits. The'training could have been done in' the groups. No good reason had ever; been given by the Minister for suggesting that he and' his officers knew more about D.efenco organisation- than Lord Kitchener did. The Defence-Com-mission' had decided that tho group system would have been better than /the present sysbyn. Mr. Vcitch suggested that commercial influences' in Wellington , had ■• weighed with the Government in creating the big camps at' Trentham and . t'eathcrston. The convenience of high officers had been another factor.' Departments had been 'created in Wellington at enormous expense to duplicate the.records and 1 duties of the groups. The commission had been impressed with' tlie fact that theie was too'much centralisation, and too, much red tape. Mr. Vcitch proceeded to criticise the policy of the Defence Department in detail. Ho considered there had been enormous waste of in'oney through the ■establishment of; tho big -camps, ivhen the work could have been dono more efficiently'in local camps. Ho asked if the- Minister thought it reasonable to accept the verdict of the officers who had established the present system as against the suggestions of the commissioners'appointed to investigate the system. 'J ho House had been treated unfairly in connection with tho report and the'evidehce. Tho documents had been ' laid on tjie table that, afternoon, but members had not had any opportunity'of reading them. He hiniilelf had asked that tne evidence should be printed, and failing the printing that he should be provided with a copy. Ho had met with refusal l in each case.. . Now ha had his sole opportunity of discussing the report and evidence. Mr. A. HARRIS (Waiteniata) urged that another opportunity should be given of discussing-the report. ."'..' Opportunity for, Discussion. The Prime Minister said that another opportunity would lie given. He did not consider, that th'o\ Government would be justified under present conditions in printing the oridence. Mr. J. A. /YOUNG- (Wnikalo) asked for an assurance that.'the House would be able to discuss the officers' •memo'rundum. . •;

The Minister of Defence said, there \vould,l)B opportunity for full dismission. Mr. .J. PATN.K (Grey Lynn) said that nobody would tul;« the report seriously. It was V white-washing. report. The commission, had taken evidence around the country, and made a report. Then the Government had • submitted the report to the officers whose conduct and policy had been-under inquiry, and these officers i had been given the last word. The Dominion would never-get to the .bottom 'of Defence expenditure until a full audit was made, and if only for that' reason the people should turn ihe National Government out of office. Did the Minister of Defence, think it « right thing that the adjutant of'a camp should conduct laud sales in Auckland while drawing ,his military pay? lie wduld like to know why this adjutant bad ever .got bis position. He had not had any military experience at all. Mr. ..T. S. Dickson (Parnell): Yes, three months. Mr. Payne said the officer in question was a relative of a hum'who was useful'to the Government. Mr. Massey:.W'ho is tho man? Mr. Payne: Mr. Gunson. The Defence Minister. Tho Defonco,Minister, in reply, said that the Defence Commission had sal in public, mid the' proceedings had been reported in (he newspapers day by day. It would be a waste of public* nio'nev to print.the evidence, which could be read by. any member of the House, i'ho conference of officers had been called lo considor the suggestions of the commission. He had been present at one meeting, and had heard a motion moved to the, effect that the New Zealand (raining system 'was preferable, to the battalion system as advocated by the commissioner. .'Returned officers' had .'liken part in the discussion, and tho conference had been almost unanimous in supporting the present system. Only one officer had voted against it, and ho Was an officer who had given evidenco on tho subject before tlia commission. Mr. Lee (Oamaru): "What value was placed on that officer's evidence by tho commission? Sir James Allen: "I don't know what value the commission placed upon it. I know what value. I placed 'upon it. and what volue the Staff placed iipoii i(." The group syp.'em >hnd never been abandoned, but tho groups had not been used for training (lie Kxpoditionary Force. _ ilo was more jvilisiicd than ever Hint New Zealand had done Ihe right thing in (raining the men in big camps, where the best instruction could be given. The .New Zealand Division had proved itself at the front, and it could mil have, proved itself: if the material had not boon good and the training had not been good. (Hear, hear.) New Zealand had not made ■the'mistake of sending away all its trained men at tho beginning of the war, and expert staffs had been available for Oic camps. It. was'unt true that the 'Department had centralised control in Wellington. Centralisation had been unavoidable in the early stages of the war, but the movement subsequently had been in the other direction. A. continuous effort had been made (o dncentruliso the work.' Mo wanted to remove any impression that might exist, that officers had been restricted in giving cvi-

"T ; —— : — \ ~ ; " ' dencc before the. commission. Every of-ficer-had been free to state.his .opinions fullv.'-.- Reference., had been made to the audit of Defence expenditure. Tho Dcfenco accounts .were audited fully by auditors appointed bv the Auditor-General. Mr.' Payne: ■~ls', not tho Auditor-Gen-eral an officer? ..'-.. Sir James Allen: The Auditor-General has been an officer. Do you want, to discredit him because he has worn the uniform? Mr. Payne: He should discard the uniform before he audits Defence accounts. The Minister said he'-'was ready to havo everything connected with tho Defence Department, discussed fully. He did not believe that members of tlie Parliament of New Zealand would foul their, own. nest without cause, and he was convinced that tho nest was clean. The conference of officers held *■ consider tho report of the Defence Commission had been "called'with the object of getting a fiill examination of the .recommendations. T.lie memorandum represented the honest opinion's of men who had been doing tho work for the last four, and a half I years, hud whom he considered had done it admirably. At 9.40 ]i,in.-the Hotiso'adjourned until 2.30 to-day. ' . -■- '