PARLIAMENT.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 53, 26 October 1912, Page 5

PARLIAMENT.

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1912. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. (Per Press Association.} Wellington, October 26. The Council met at 2.30 p.m. Washing Up. The Town Boards Amendment and Widows Pensions Bill were put through their final stages. Tne Defence Amendment Bill was re-commitccd, and a new clausa inserted on the motion of the Minister, to provide that where an individual is arrested for default of payment of a fine and costs, the Minister may, as a condition of discharging him, require him to pay the whole or part cf such lino as the Minister determines; notwithstanding that he may have been detained in military custody and been discharged by Ministerial warrant, such person shall remain liable for the payment of fines, and such payments may bo enforced by attachment order or otherwise, but if the person is detained in military custody for the full period specified in the warrant of military custody lie shall bo discharged from all liability to pay such line or costs. The Bill was reported with amendments, and.the third reading carried. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The House met at 2.30. The Imprest Bill, was introduced by Governor’s Message. Mr. Ell enquired, as to the methods being pursued by the State Fire Insurance Department. The Depart men saved £130,000 a year to the country. He desired to know whether the Advances Department insisted on p. op or ties being insured in the State Fire Office.

Mr. Allen stated that people win; borrowed from the Advances Office were told that they must insure fclieii properties, and that preference must be given to the State .Office. Replying to Sir Joseph Ward, Mr. Allen said that he estimated that a sum of £142,000 would bo available foi the Supplementary Estimates. Mr. Fisher stated that there was no power in the hands of the Advance;Department to tie up its client to the State Fire Office. Mr. Isitt said that clients of the Advances Department should be compelled to insure with the State Fire Office. ' Dr. Newman held a similar opinion. He thought that the Minister was assisting large private concerns. Mr. Allen said that he had done all lie could to make the Government Departments as successful as possible. The Act laid it down that clients coni.! select any reputable office, in which to insure. The defining of “a reputable office” was left to the Minister. He could not possibly refuse consent to a client insuring in what was a reputable office. Mr. Eli: Your predecessors did. Mr. Allen : They did not. Mr. Ell: I’ll prove it. Mr. Forbes stated that lie knew that the Superintendent of the Advances Department insisted that insurance should be effected in the State Office. Mr. Wilford said that he would take the' first available opportunity of moving an amendment to the present Act which would strike out the words “oi in airy other reputable company,” mak ing it imperative that the Department’s clients shall insure with the State Office. He was looking forward to the day when insurance would he in tho hands of the State.

Mr. Atmore thought that if a borrower could'‘get his property insured a t a lower rate than that charged by the State Office he should bo allowed to do so. Otherwise he should be compelled to insure in the State Office The present Government say: “It is preferable that you should insure with the Government Office.” Mr. Fisher said that the State Office Insurance Office had bluffed everyone for years. They had nothing to do with loans, as they were not the mort gagors. He believed that every bit of Government business shoiild go through State offices. The House adjourned at 5.30, and resumed at 7.30. The debate on the Imprest Bill was continued. Replying to Mr. MacDonald, Mr. Allen said that every opportunity would bo given to enable officers of junior cadets to sit for commissions in Terri torials. The Bill was put through all its stages. The amendments made by the Council in the Widows Pensions Amendment Bill and Defence Amendment Bill were agreed to.

THE LAND BILL. Wellington, October 25. The House resumed consideration of the Land Bill in Committee. Mr. Massey moved to eliminate clause'3l, enabling the fee simple of land for settlement leasehold to i e ac- 1 quired at the present value, with a view to making the provision clearer. Mr. Laurenson said that Parliament, by acquiescing in the proposil, would lie committing ,i national crime. He protested against such an iniquitous clause. Replying to Mr. Russell, Mr. Henries said that the freehold was no! refused to renewable lessees of ordinary Crown lands. Later, Mr. Massey informed Mr. Russell that the reason why the freehold was not conceded to renewable leaseholders on Crown land was that the whole of it was endowment land. Mr. Massey added that next year another Bill would be introduced dealing with L.I.P. tenants on lands for settlement land. Finally, he strongly defended the freehold as the best lor the settler and the best for the country as a whole. Mr. Witty contended that, land let on lease belonged to the people, and the Government had no right to dispose of it. In answer to further questions by Mr. Russell, the Prime Minister said that there was no intention of affecting the status of national endowment lands. The principle of the clause was to give lessees the option of the freehold at a price to be computed as between the original value and the pres cut day value, loss the increased value, which the State cannot take account of until the end of the term of tli lease. Mr. F orbes contended that the men who fought for the leasehold were the best friends of the farmer, because they had kept in the background of th - agitation for taxation of land values. . Mr. Ro! rertson contended that the Government’s idea that peace and prosperity would ho spread over the land by the carrying of freehold proposals was quite erroneous. Mr. MacDonald did not think that advantage would lie taken of the Government’s freehold proposals. After midnight the House continued the discussion in Committee of clause 31 of the Land Bill. A now clause, moved bv Mr. Massey, providing that one-third of the value of native land placed in the hands cf the Government for settle-

mont purposes may be advanc ed to native owners, was carried. Mr. Davey moved an amend mont disqualifying successful competitors at a ballot from again taking part therein. This was lost by 39 to 14. The Bill was reported with amendments, amid applause from both sides of the House. _ The third reading was postponed until next sitting day, and the House rose.