PARLIAMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 81848, 19 September 1906, Page 3

PARLIAMENT.

TUESDAY, SKI'TK.MIiXK iS. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. By Telfgraph.—Press Association. The Council met ai 2.30. The Juvenile Offenders and Sale of Explosives Bills were read a third time and passed. A long discussion ensued on native 'and settlement, and the Council rose at five p.m.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The House met at 2.30 p.m. THIRD READINGS. The Fire Brigades Bill, Payment of Jurors B.'ll, Habitual Criminals Bill, and the Horowlunua Block Amendment Bill were read a third time.

ADVANCES TO SETTLERS AMENDMENT BILL. The adjourned debate on the s c cond reading uas resumed. Mr JENNINGS condemnedthepoor fees provided for va . ua!i , Jn in , a distncts where the travelling was difficult. Mr HOGG was highly pleased with the provision for making further advances without further deeds. Mr 1- LA I MAN asked foruiore uniformity. Mr LAURLNSON" would like to see the total abolition of the go beon lawyer. Mr UILI ORD could not conceive such a possibility. Sir JOSEPH WARD replied, piomising ! if tin- provisions in the • o'i!f| not be extended to the Maw. P'. and thankmy hon. members loi : reception ac curded to the Bill. I lie Bill was read a second time on the voices. EVENING SITTING. TOWN DISTRICTS BILL. The second reading of the Bill \v,u moved by the Premier, who said t was grcail; neicl'd. Mr-THOMSON supported the lias putting an end to dual autlin : and thus ensuiing the luaiiit' ni. - of the main roads pacing itiiu, :

theso i«»un distrn ts. Mr ERASER and Mr K. M \ KENZIE denounced the Hi.l as • ly 'o -enable small hamlets to crate county r.r« s and pr» vcmu the lifiine r.ance «>f county road-. Mr HELD contended that iT«»r»* 1 would })<• li,r<Miip. but the Jldi I would on the \«.h .i«- Ik yrv bevti rial. )\r pointed out th,.? tin* t ->;. : - ui<<kjng ht<> !e'u-eho.d'-» ne jpssary to The formation oi iLtown district was good enough to safeguard against V.v evii> teavd b\ th f> previous speakers. Mr ELL giving these districts the municipal fian<-|*o. Mr MILLS regarded town dtri'cts as municipal educator-. Mr FLATMAX kn< w town dis triets whirh had been rated b*- omty councils which had not spec, ne

prnny of tln-ir rates \\>'l bwundarirs. Mr RI'TIIKRFORI) «u:>, <<l. ati'l Mr UKRRIF.S otipos*'-.' ■. itli ■"rem tli" i uunty p'Uit "t vrv n<l >,])<■ }atTr r pcinf'Hl out the en;'' 1 f rnad by-laws which was sure 101Imv tli*' unlimit'd formation oljown

districts. f Tiif PKKMIEU. in rep y, if there wa- anyihing in thf»;ii ni'-uts emp'«'V»*d. no would f ver be evo'wd from nymtv. whfri*a>. a ma-er o) t ,hj i|i- i• w«M>' a g;e.it nianv. One Ik\. i>cn !;«man. who t : v |U h;ul ;i rotinfies b.H in his pn< ke|/o ; liers had a«ked for a local g<rnmen{ bi'l. and »hev always eppo-<jsn< !i a fie * i'd ihr ll^ 1 ' tlial !hi* I.of a : Goveintivn' Hi b«down this «p«.sion .but >t lv 'xpecfd to go Hirou.yh. ll«Jppr,al- • d to hj« n. member- *o siv ; r her •h ; - DiMri'l* Bi'l, whieh.u ( Iced for far and wide, ought tf»« kepr b.i'k for the (others. The Bi'l was read a scco; time on the voices. 1

fwou'd net produce the desired effect,] I and its ri'tVrencc in a comniilt-1 j ee. lie agreed that the <» d practice j was v«tv unfair. |

Mr BAKI3KR object'-d 10 tin; maximum limit for boroughs of £350 as too low, and pointed out that the k r limit make tlv individual limit much lower. In prac tio\ \\eliin^ton would lose £IOO a y.<\'ir at Mr SYMKS said the local bodies wouUl suffer similarly. Mr KKMINtiTON calculated that in the Kanj;iukei counly then- would be a 10-s of £350. The I'KKMIKK, interjecting, said Mr KeniiiiMion was as the old subsidies wen- much ,ess than lie placed 1 hem.

Mr MASSEY tin >uklit the tcunly councils w'■ Li r il all eel less under the Bill. lU' thought that tin- subsidies began to > soon lime farthing rate), and ended too soon at six farthings, (A voice: It ought to be i;.) Mi Massey agreed with twelve, lie urged the reference cf the Bill to a committee.

Messrs Izard, R. McKenzie, and Fisher opposed on the same grounds. Mr ELL argued that under the Bill more money would be divided, ,6100,000, as against the £83,000 of last year. lie would not give any subsidy to any local body iaising less than a penny.

After further discussion, the PRE MIER, in reply, showed from a return that no local body had ever received more than £2OOO in tlie past, and that therefore there would be no reductions. The large cities would certainly suffer, but to declare that all round there would be a reduction, in face of the £IOO,OOO limit, wjs to beat the wind. He saw no ambigui ties or difficulties, but he would be quite prepared to submit the measure for a committee in view of its importance, and he would give notice of the committee the next day or the day after.

The second reading passed on the voices, and the Premier gave formal notic of the committee. The House adjourned at 10.20. LOCAL AUTHORITIES' SUB SIDIES BILL. The PREMIER moved the second reading, and explained that the Bill limits the subsidies to be annually paid to local bodies lo £IOO,OOO to be allocated on the principle of tlie higher the rate (all the rates together)). the higher the subsidy. Mr JAMES ALLES feared the Bill