PARLIAMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 89, 23 July 1910, Page 4

PARLIAMENT.

i "* ~ I FRIDAY, JULY 22. ! LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. The Council met at 2.30, and immediately adjourned until 11 p.m. lor the Imprest Supply Bill, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. TECHNICAL EDUCATION. In the House this afternoon, on a' motion by the Hon. G. Fowlds to lay: the report of the Teachers' Conference • on the table, Mr. Taylor (Christchurch) \ raised the question of technical educa-1 tion, with special reference to Christ-1 church Technical School, He complained i of the inadequacy bi technical education I generally, and hoped the Minister would give effect to recommendations of the; conference as to the necessity for in- 1 creased expenditure on technical educa-. tion. He protested against the Department making the cost of technical edu-l cation a burden on the local bodies and. not a charge on the State. I Mr. Thomson (Wallace) contended! that the State should not be asked to' bear the cost of tuition in such subjects as shorthand and typewriting and such

classes, Mr. J. Luke (Wellington) fully endorsed the remarks of Mr. Taylor. Some time ago the Minister of Education announced that sooner or later the cost of technical education would have to be borne by the local authorities. Mr. 'Fowlds denied having made any such statement at any time, and said the most arrant humbug had been talked on the question. Whenever the Board asked for funds for new buildings, the Minister had no right to say the Government had gone far enough. Primary education was, after all, more important to the community than technical education. The claim put forth by Christchurch was extravagant. The whole system of making grants was rotten to the core. A large expenditure was now being made without proper control, and this should receive the attention of the House. NATIONAL DEBT SINKING FUND. A Bill for providing a sinking lund for the extinction of the public debt was introduced by Governor's message and read a first time. THE GOVERNMENT AND RETRENCHMENT.

The Imprest Supply Bill was introduced by Governor's message. On the motion that the House go into committee, Mr. Herdman moved, o& an amendment, "that, inasmuch as the Premier's statement in 1901) that he] could reduce departmental expenditure J by £250,000 a year without reducing | the efficiency, was unequivocal (sic) oi extravagant administration, this House is of opinion that the civil service be i controlled by a public service board." | Mr. Herdman, speaking in support of, the amendment, said the House uaa no! satisfactory iniormation regarding the] Premier's declaration of policy in con-] nection with the civil service, nor in regard to servants who had been retired as a result of the retrenchment schemes. He asked for details as to servants dispensed with, and the salaries they were in receipt oi, and if any' principle was followed in carrying outj the retrenchment scheme. He criticised i Mr. Dinnie's appointment on the Native Land Board, for which his training and! experience had not fitted him. The onlyi conclusion that could be arrived at as a

result of the Premier's declaration, was that the quarter million a year nad been wasted on. departmental expenses. Had there been a board in existence, the necessity for the retrenchment scheme would never have existed. A board would also rid the country of the detestable system of public patronage obtaining at present. Mr. Poland (Ohinemuri) added that Australian opinion was adverse to public service boards, in the Commonwealth.

Mr. Malcolm supported the amendment.

In the House in the evening, Mr. Malcolm resumed the debate on Mr. Herdman's amendment, and asked that full publicity be given in regard to the retrenchment scheme.

Sir Joseph Ward said the last speaker had applied to two Ministers to engage men and reinstate others who had Deen discharged. This high-souled economist, Mr. Malcolm, had also inserted an advertisement in a paper in his electorate asking his constituents to place before him their public works requirements. How could the Government be expected to economise wiien members mada so many exorbitant demands on the public purse? Mr. Herdman's speech was calculated to make the people believe the country was going to the dogs. He taxed Mr. Herdman with deliberate misrepresentation in regard to expenditure. Figures had been quoted with the object of proving extravagance, but no notice had been taken of the increased revenue during the period 190G-1909 mentioned by Mr. Herdman. Dealing with the retrenchment scheme, Sir Joseph Ward said the reductions ejected were £300,000 a year. The Government would not retrench more than they had done. Yet the Opposition clamored for further retrenchment, and at the same liuio for the establishment of a public service board, composed of highly salaried men. .Mr. Massey, referring to the Premier's criticism of Mr. Malcolm's demands for. votes, said he hoped the day would.come' when it would be unnecessary to men-: tion either a road or it bridge in Par-' liament, the time of which should be devoted solely to legislative work. He heartily supported Mr. Herdman's pro-, posal to set up a public service board. l If ever a commission was necessary, one I was necessary to investigate the civil, service. Mr. Dinnie's appointment would never have been made if a public ser-j vice board was in existence. Very seri-l ous offences had been committed in the! Land and Income Tax Department recently, all of which went to show the necessity for reform hi the public ser- : vice. Parliament was entitled to •> great deal more information in connection with the cases mentioned. .

Mr. Laurenson said it was a cruel proposal that the civil servants who had been retired should have their names published so that they might be handicapped in the struggle of life. The amendment was rejected by 2tf to 23. and the Bill passed.

A discussion arose on the national endowment, in which Sir Joseph Ward, and Messrs. Massey, Witty. Wilford! Taylor (Thames) and Buchnnau look part, the Leader of the Opposition contending that settlers on national endowments should bo given the right of the freehold. Sir Joseph Ward said the (loyernment had no intention of conceding this. Mr. Massey said settlers should be informed of the tenure, on which the land was granted. Mr. Buddo said it was absurd to miggest that endowments should be sold and the money invested in suburban lands.