PARLIAMENTARY.

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 3932, 5 August 1881, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

(Pek Pkess Association.)

Wellington, Thursday

PENSIONS BILL

Mr Shrimski moved the second reading of the Pensions Bill. He had no wish to deprive anyone of what was justly due, but recent revelations showed the necessity for exercising some control to prevent abuse in the matter. The bill was not proposed to be retrospective, but to prevent in future such scandals as had occurred in the past.

The Hon. J Hall objected to the details of the bill, and its interference with rights which had accrued under the statute. It would be a breach of faith to pass this bill. Mr Ballaoee agreed in condemning anything in the nature of repudiation, but contended the bill did not contemplate anything of the kind. All that was asked wps that before a pension was granted Parliament should be informed of the basis on which the pension was computed. This could not prejudice the just or legal rights of anyone. Mr McLean thought that a much more comprehensive measure would be found necessary when the Public Accounts Committee reported on the subject. The present bill was defective in many respects.

Mr Collins did not agree with Mr Ballance's interpretation of the bill's mean ing. He thought the bill amounted to repudiation of all pensions in progress of accruing. Sir Gr. Grey insisted on the justice of all papers relating to a peDsion being placed before Parliament before any pension was granted. Unlawful pensions had already been granted in pursuance of illegal arrangements. MrHursthouse supported the bill under the belief that it would not prejudice any legal rights. Mr Bowen said that, after the explanation given as to what the bill really aimed at, he saw no serious objection to it. It could be made better in Committee.

Mr Sheehan supported the bill, as it was right Parliament should know the reasons of a pension being granted before it was so granted. He condemned the pension system altogether. Messrs Kelly and Shepherd supported the principle of the bill. Mr Saunders thought the law should be so distinct on the subject that any person entitled to a pension should be able to get it as a matter of right, without asking a favour of either the House or Government. He was, however, altogether opposed to pensions. Mr Brown regretted that when pension rights were voted, in 1872, the claims had not all been brought out. It would have been the cheapest method of procedure.

Mr Fulton supported the bill. Mr Shrimski replied, and the'bill was read a second time.

GOLD DUTY,

Mr Seddon moved the second reading of the Gold Duty Abolition Bill, urging; that the time had arrived for giving some relief to the mining population and relieving them from a special tax which pressed heavily upon them. At some length he urged the justice of this claim, and declared he was thoroughly in earnest in bringing the proposal forward. Mr Brown supported the bill, and spoke strongly in favor of the total abolition of the gold duty

Mr Beeves also urged the total abolition of the duty. The apathy of the Government in regard to encouraging prospecting was, however, more prejudical to the gold mining industry than the gold duty was- A few rock boring machines judiciously used would largely benefit the goldfields.

Mr Gisborne considered the gold duty indefensible on any grounds of principle or policy.

Mr Shepherd also urged the abolition of the tax, as being a special one, and unjust in principle.

Mr Rolleston would not oppose the bill, and admitted that the mining interests deserved greater attention than they had received. After the session, he hoped charge of the Mines Department would be given to some Minister with more time than he had.

Mr iSheelian suggested that the reduction or abolition of the duty should be left optional with the local bodies.

iVtr iSeddon expressed approval of this suggestion, and the bill was read a second time, and referred to the Goldfields' Committee.

Mr Tole moved the second reading of the Adoption of Children Bill. Messrs Stewart and Bowen approved of the principle of the Bill, but thought its details would require great consideration and amendment.

Mr Shepherd feared the bill as it stood might legalise white slavery.

The Bill was read a second time

Mr McDonald moved the second reading of Gisborne Harbour Board Bill. It proposed an endowment of 44,000 acres which had cost the Government only £10,600.

Mr Hursthousft strongly opposed all these endowments, and Mr liolleston thought this one of a class of Bills not to be encouraged. ,

Mr Turnbull supported the Bill. Messrs Hall, McLead, Pitt, and others would support the Bill so far as it related to the establishing of a Harbor Board but not the endowment.

Messrs Kelly, Macandrew, Murray, and others supported the claims of the East Coast to consideration. In had not heretofore been fairly treated. The Bill was read a second time, and the House rose at 1.10.