GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 709, 27 September 1876, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

(Per Press Agency ) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Monday. September 26. COUNTIES BILL. On the motion for the House going into committee on the Counties Bill, Mr SEYMOUR took exception to many portions of the Bill, especially to the extra borrowing power granted to counties as compared with the latitude allowed to Provincial Councils in that way. Mr BOLLESTON was going to speak of the Bill as one he would endeavor to assist through committee, but in its present form it would not be satisfactory to the country at large. It was calculated to cause confusion instead of harmony between the general and local Governments, The principal defect of the Bill was that it separated the town from the country ; that it took too sudden a step in the direction of change. The country generally did not really know what abolition meant, as was admitted by the Government the other night, because one district would naturally have different ideas as to what should take the place of that which was taken away. He did not think this form would be acceptable. He had frame i some resolutions which indicated his idea of that which was required. They were as follows —“ (1) That the counties shall include boroughs, and shall be coterminous with the existing provinces, subject to alterations in their boundaries, as provided for in section 9 of the Counties Bill, and with power to create new counties; (2) That there shall be a council for each county or province, consisting of not less than nine and not more than fifteen members ; (3) Such council shall be elected by the Koad Boards and municipalities within each county or province, and where ro Road Boards are constituted, provision shall be made for the division of the county into districts for the purpose; (4) The chairman of the council shall sit in the council, and shall have a deliberative and casting vote on all proceedings of the council ; (5) In addition to the discharge of such business as shall be entrusted to him by the council, the chairman shall perform such duties as may from time to time devolve upon him by authority of the Governor or of the General Assembly. He pointed out that there were other objections to the Bill, such as the spontaneous breaking off of counties. As to the financial proposals, they presented nothing new, and they would have the counties coming to the House for money as the provinces had done, and he thought this was the reason why the Government had provided for chairmen of boards not being eligible as representatives in the General Assembly. The bon member went on to say that the borrowing powers, as given, were fraught with very considerable danger. It was taking a step backwards he thought; and the boundaries of the counties at all satisfactory, and he suggested that they should be coterminous with those under the provincial system. Then again he could not see why the land fund should not be evenly distributed throughout the country. The separation of boroughs was a grave mistake, and calculated to impair the satisfactory working of the Act. As to the number of members of councils, he thought by having fewer members the general interests of the country would be more sought after than individual interests. The election of members to County Councils should be left to the Road Boards and boroughs. In conclusion, he trusted he should be given credit for a desire to serve the country in the position he took up regarding the Bill, to which, he could assure the House, he should offer no factious opposition. Sir G. Grey wished to know what reply the Government had received from the home Government; as to the abolition of provinces, reminding them of what Lord Carnarvon had stated with respect to the question of confederation, as affecting the West Indies, that it could not be proceeded with by Her Majesty’s Government, save at the spontaneous request of each Legislature concerned. Hon W. H. Reynolds expressed regret that the Government did not deem it neces sary to offer some explanation as to the reasons which had guided them in remodelling this Bill, which was practically a new Bill. He pointed out to the House that there was an almost unanimous wish on the part of the Otago members that Otago should be one county. He did not think it would he wise for the House to ignore the wide spread feeling of the people on this matter. Mi Joyce and Mr Pyke pointed out that the Vioii member for Port Chalmers was in error in stating that the Otago members were unanimous in desiring that Otago should be made into one county. ctus Premier said the reason Government did not give any fresh explanation was be ohuio the previous Government had given a fu'-l explanation of the prnciple of the Bill, and the alterations subsequently made in the Bill had been indicated, and they did not therefore deem it necessary to take up the time of the House by explaining what it already knew. The principal objections taken to the Bill were of a nature that would be better discussed in committee. Mr HoWE thought the Bill did not carry out what they had been led to expect from the promises of the Government, He thought the Government should have laid out their boundaries, and then left it for the members of- the different localities to adjust them finally. Mr Andrew would do all he could to atn i,d Hie Bill. One great recommendation ot the Hill was that it was an imperfect measure, and that it left it with the people of i he various districts to adopt it to their requirements. It was perfectly impossible any measure of the kind could be made peifeet at once. Mr Woolcock pointed out the uselessness of discussing the details of the Bill at that si age It would be far better to go int<-ron-mittee at once, and do the best they could with the Bill by mutual concessions Than after they went back to their constituents, and initiated the new system of

Government, they would come back to the House next session with a better idea of what the people required. The House then went into committee on (he Bill. The amendments made in the old Bill were then agreed to pro forma , and the Bill reported with amendments and ordered to be recomitted to-morrow. EDUCATION BILL. Hon C. 0. Bowen moved the second reading of the Education Boards Bill, which provides for preserving the existing institutions until such time as the Government were prepared to deal with the whole question in an exhaustive manner. Mr Montgomery took exception to the provision for levying a rate of £1 per child. It was also very objectionable to make the school committee collect that tax. Mr Reid thought the rate objected to by the member for Akaroa was a very desirable one, as had been found by experience. He thought on the whole the Bill was very fairly drawn. Mr Stevens, while agreeing with the Bill in the main, took exception to the provision for charging for that which he held should be provided free by the State. Mr BOLLESTON thought the Bill went too far in interfering with the present system. It was quite incompatible to have a system of fees and compulsory education. Mr J. B. Brown was also strongly opposed to the fees, inasmuch as it would press too heavily upon the poor man. It would be far better to impose a tax upon property. Mr Stafford believed that the cost of education should be borne out of the consolidated fund. Though the fees provided for in the Bill were not burdensome, still he held that the principle was a vicious one. He thought the Bill a very patchwork affair. He admitted that they could not deal with the question of education comprehensively at that period of the session, but he hoped to gee a Bill brought down which would throw the annual maintenance of education throughout the colony upon the consolidated revenue. Sir G. Grev, Mr Fisher, Mr Lumsden. and Mr Wason all objected to the clause providing for fees. Hon C. O. RoWEN, in reply, pointed out that the measure was merely a temporary expedient to tide over a period, and interfered as little as possible with the existing state of things. The fees proposed to be charged were absolutely a diminution of present rates throughout the colonv. It was the intention of the Government to introduce next session a Bill that would make education as free as possible. The House adjourned at 1.15 a m. Tuesday, September 26. MR. PHILLIPS. The evidence in Mr Coleman Phillips’ case was ordered to be printed. legislative council, Mr Taiaroa asued the Native Minister whether the Government intend to take any action, as promised by the Government in the years 1872, 1873, 1874, and 1875, towards advising the Governor to summon a person of the native race from the Middle Island to the Legislative Council. The Native Minister said it was not the intention of the Government to take any steps in the matter. FIRST READINGS. The following Bills were introduced and read a first time :—Bill to repeal the Goldfields Act Amendment Act, 1875 (No 1); Bill to give all males in New Zealand, twenty-one years of age and upwards, a vote ; Bill to suppress the rabbit nuisance ; Bill to extend the Provincial Appropriation Acts Extension Act, 18 7 5. GOVERNMENT BUSINESS The Premier a.nounced that the Government proposed next week to ask the House to give them Wednesday, in order to enable them to advance business. COUNTIES BILL The Counties Bill was re committed. Clause 5 and 6 were postponed Clauses 7 to 10 were passed. Clause 11 was amended, so as to enable the first elected councils to take a lengthened consideration of whether they should adopt the second schedule of the Act or not. A discussion was raised by Mr W. Wood, as to whether the debate in committee should be reported or not. The matter was allowed to drop, the general opinion being that the Hansard reporters should continue reporting the debate. On clause 14, relating to creating of new counties, Mr Donald Reid moved a proviso that they should not have a less area than fifty square miles. The House divided, and the amendment was rf jected by 36 to 27 Ths House rose at 5.80