For an Extra Hour of Daylight

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 97, 15 July 1927, Page 12

For an Extra Hour of Daylight

A LIVELY DEBATE

SUMMER TIME BIEL LIVES {THE SUN’S Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, Thursday. QNE little hour of daylight caused a great deal of discussion by members of Parliament today when, after 18 years of persistent agitation, during which victory appeared momentarily on the horizon several times, Mr. T. K. Sidey, Dunedin South, rose in the House of Representatives and moved the second reading of the Daylight Saving Bill, aiming at an extra hour of daylight for four months of the year.

Mr. Sidey was accorded the warm plaudits of all sides of the House on rising and resuming his seat, but members indulged in free discussion on the merits of the measure. Arguments for and against daylight-saving were largely upon the lines already traversed for many years. Those opposing the bill advanced the views of the man on the land, declaring that the experiment would be disastrous to the farmer as well as to his hard-working wife. Advocates of Mr. Sidey’s proposal said that city people, as well as the general community, desired it. Mr. T. M. Wilford spoke of his experience of summer-time at Home, and said that no one, not even the hardest worked rural labourers, opposed the system. On the contrary everyone now hailed it as a wonderful thing. He had supported it for IS years.

Mr. W. D. Lysnar: You had better give it up now. Mr. Wilford: I see no reason to.

HOURS, TALK AND COSTS Mr. W. S. Glenn, Rangitikei, made a fiery speech in opposition to day light-saving and caused the House and the full galleries great amusement at the warmth of his remarks. Sympathy had allowed the member for Dunedin South to bring the bill in for IS years, he said, and sympathy had allowed it to go through the second reading on occasions. His sympathy was with the farmer. “However, let us get down to facts and figures,” he said. “Parliament costs £6O an hour. Multiply that by .18 years and see how much this has cost. (Laughter.) Does the hon. member think the farmer never gets up early in the morning at present? He is out as soon as it is daylight and as for this physical fitness, nonsense; that is all up to putty. For goodness sake leave the farmer alone. He does not wish to be called the one Goliath of New Zealand. He only wants to be left alone in -peace and happiness. If any farmer on this side of the House votes for this the constituencies will fix up his little job next year. Of course, I have a sort of air of independence. (Laughter.) I can say what I like about it.” Mr. Glenn certainly did say wliat he liked about it, and thumped the desk in enthusiasm to the delight of his colleagues on both sides of the House. Mr. A. M. Samuel, Ohinemuri, also opposed the bill and reminded the House that daylight-saving aimed at making farmers nightwatchmen as well. It was the duty of every representative of the country constituency to vote the bill out. FARMER’S WIFE IN GARDEN A member: Are you speaking as a farmer? Mr. Samuel (smilingly): No. As a member of Parliament looking for a constituency for the future. I v am satisfied to know that those in the constituency I am representing, temporarily (laughter), will say when I go back ‘well done, thou good and faithful servant.’ ” (Renewed laughter.) Mr. Samuel caused unrestrained laughter as he unwittingly called the bill the “Daylight Slaving Bill” and held up to ridicule the spectacle of women on the farm rising one hour earlier in the morning, slaving all day and putting in her spare time weeding the garden, it having been claimed by supporters of the bill that gardening would be encouraged. The debate concluded at 12.30 a.m. when Mr. Sidey replied. The division was taken on the second reading and resulted: For the bill 33 Against 21