GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2532, 22 July 1893, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES. The House met at 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday. HANSARD. Mr Richardson complained that some of the reports of speeches of members as printed in Hansard were simply execrable, and the Speaker promised to bring the matter before the Reporting Debates Committee. THE MINISTRY. The Premier said that he desired to inform the House that the Hon. Mr Montgomery had accepted a seat in the Executive Council, and had been sworn in that morning. As to the other two portfolios—those of Justice and Native Affairs—he might say Mr Reeves would take charge of the Justice Department. As to the Native Department, the Government were still of opinion that the Department should be abolished, but they had come to no definite conclusion on the subject. Mr Carroll, however, would look after Native legislation in the meantime, but would not hold the portfolio. The Premier said that the whole end of the Government policy was that no distinction should be made between the two races. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES. Replying to a question, Mr Reeves stated that the Friendly Societies Amendment Bill which passed the House last session, or a modified Bill, would be introduced this session, and he hoped it would be passed into law. FINANCIAL DEBATE. After a long debate on a motion for the adjournment of the debate, moved by Mr Fish, who spoke on the Otago Central Railway, Mr Duthie resumed the debate on the Financial Statement. He referred at great length to several matters in connection with the Government policy, his criticism being generally of an adverse character. Sir Robert Stout said that in the course of this debate reference had been made to the past, and he was proud of it. It had been sneeringly said that when a Liberal Government was in office their finance was always weaker, but he repudiated that assertion. He defended the administration of the Grey Government, of which he was a member, and said no Government had ever been in office that was more saving in ordinary departmental expenditure than that Government. Notwithstanding the tremendous drop in the land fund in 1879, the deficit of the Grey Government was actually only £BI,OOO. He admitted that owing to the land fund the Atkinson Ministry that succeded them were placed in great difficulty, but he blamed the Government for over-stating the liabilities left by the Grey Government. He showed the position of theStout-Yogeland Atkinson Governments, reminding the House that in 1888 taxation was imposed by the Atkinson Ministry to the extent of nearly £30,000, and £3,500,000 was borrowed, although they posed as a nonborrowing Government. Coming to the present Financial Statement, he disagreed with the exemption of improvements, as it was the duty of the Ministry to make their position as strong as possible, and they could not afford to make exemptions. Members of the Opposition appeared to be forgetful on this point, for only three of that party voted last year against the exemption of improvements. He also opposed the increase in the graduated tax, although he believed in the principle of progressive taxation, if it were not penal. He denied that the farmers were being treated more severely than other people under this new form of taxation. They should now begin to have a sinking fund. Sneers had been cast at the Government with regard to the increase of the public debt, but as a matter of fact they had paid £200,000 off the public debt, and paid £230,000 into the Public Works Fund, from consolidated revenue, which practically meant that £430,000 had been paid off in two years. He considered that the time had come when 1,000,000 acres of land should be set apart for hospitals and charitable aid, the land to be held on real perpetual lease, with no right of purchase whatever. He believed that the Government should have the entire control of the railways, and submitted that £15,000,000 to £20,000,000 of property should not be handed over to irresponsible men. The present system of management had utterly failed, and he contended that the railways could not be properly managed without political control. After a passing reference to the Cheviot purchase, ha went on to explain and defend the term “ new Liberalism,” which they had heard so often. New Liberalism did nothing to interfere with the self-reliance of the people, and on this account he supported the co-operative principle, as it taught self-reliance. There were two things the State would have to face in the future—viz., to preserve the good name of their statesmen, and pay them properly for their work. If they kept their finance strong, and went on moderately with ,their public works; if they kept up the efficiency of the Civil Service and made it a credit to the colony, he believed that there was a great future before the colony. Captain Bussell congratulated Sir Robert Stout on his speech, and also complimented the House on Mr Montgomery’s accession to the Cabinet. Be felt sure he would strengthen the Government. Captain Russell was sorry that he could not compliment the Treasurer on the Financial Statement, for there was very little finance in it all. He advanced several arguments in support of the present system of management of the railways, holding that if the Minister for Public Works had a seat on the Board the continuity of management would be destroyed to the detriment of the service. The profits on the railways had enormously increased since the Commissioners took ihem over, and he failed to see why the control should be taken out of their hands. He disapproved of the proposal to remove the taxation from improvements, as it would relieve those who could well afford to pay. He explained his views on taxation generally. He did not object to reasonable taxation, but what was objectionable was the uncertainty to what might happen owing probably to the ill temper of particular Ministers. What the country man objected to was that an undue amount of taxation was being placed on him in order to relieve the man in town. Mr Meredith, while agreeing with the Statement on the whole, regretted that it did not make a more detailed reference to questions of social reform and woman suffrage. He warmly complimented the Government on the Cheviot purchase, and, having an intimate acquaintance with the property, he could say that the colony had secured a great bargain. Mr Allen moved the adjournment of the debate. The motion was agreed to, and the House rose at 1.20 a.m. The House met at2.3op.m. on Thursday, answers to questions. In reply to questions it was stated that the Government could not give a pledge afford facilities for discussing » motion

for the purchase of the Wellington-Mana-watu Railway, but any hon. member could take his own opportunity to bring such a motion forward; that the period for granting a bonus for the exportation of fish had been extended for five years. THE FINANCIAL DEBATE. Mr Allen resumed the debate on the Financial Statement. He heartily congratulated the House on the reappearance of Sir Robert Stout amongst them. He agreed with the removal of taxation from improvements, but he could not look upon the increase in the graduated tax in the same light. He criticised Sir Robert Stouts’s exposition of the doctrine of “New Liberalism.” It appeared to him a sort of Socialism that cwuld not be worked out. He thought that the lease in perpetuity was a disgrace to the colony, and that the co-operative system of labor was doing harm to the country instead of relieving the unemployed difficulty. The estimates for the present year were higher than they had ever been, and so far from saving £53,000, there was an increase of £134,000. The Premier’s claim to have reduced the pulic debt of the colony was a sham, as it had been actually increased by more than half a million. Mr Fisher, referring to Sir Robert Stout’s speech of the previous night, said that the hon. gentleman in that speech had opposed the graduated tax of the present Government, the exemption of improvements, and what he called the eternal lease of the Ministry. He referred to the policy of the Ministry, and condemned them for their interminable interference with everybody in the name of democracy. If there was any surplus it was the duty of Government to feea the education system, but Ministers invariably replied that there were no funds for necessary educational works, and that proved that there was in reality no surplus. He congratulated Mr Ward personally on the care with which he had prepared his Statement, and he would give him credit for having honestly tried to set before the country the true state of its business. Mr McLean and Mr Wilson spoke at length, their remarks being favourable to the Government. Mr J. W. Kelly moved the adjournment of the debate. The motion was agreed to, and the House rose at 1.25 a.m.