PARLIAMENT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2694, 27 December 1909, Page 5

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

THE ESTIMATES PASSED.

fPiJit Press Association. I WELLINGTON. Dec. 24. After 12 o’clock on Thursday, the discussion on the Estimates was continued. The House went' into committee, and passed the EA-mat-es, rising at 3.20 a.m. / THE FINANCIAL ADVISER’S SALARY REINSTATED AND OPPOSED. At the afternoon sitting of the House of Representatives to-day, when the vote on the Supplementary Estimates £4OO salary of the financial adviser to the Government in London came up for consideration, Mr. Massey expressed surprise and indignation that Sir Joseph Ward should have placed this vote on the Supplementary Estimates, after it had been voted out by the House when the Estimates were under consideration. He accused the Premier of using the Governor for party purposes, and said that the action of the Premier was highly improper, and placed the House in an. awkward position. Sir Joseph Ward denied that he had used the Governor for party purposes. It was necessary that the vote should; be made, and he had taken the constitutional course in putting it on the Supplementary Estimates for the reconsideration of the House. Had he paid the salary to the Financial Adviser he would have been accused off making a surreptitious payment. Mr. Massey then moved to reduce the vote by £399, and he asked the Chairman if he could call for 399 divisions on the motion to reduce the vote by £399 downwards. The Chairman said that the position was that Mr. Massey could divide the House in the way suggested. Mr. Massey said he would do so. In the discussion which followed, Mr. Wright said that a common jury could not be asked to reconsider its verdict. Yet the House, which was above the law. was asked to reconsider its vote.

Mr. Hogan contended that the matter rested with the House. It was for a majority of the members to say if the Prime Minister’s action was. right or wrong. Mr. Herdman said Sir Joseph. Ward’a principle was to endeavor iv get the* 60 members who had voted against theamount to change their opinions. The Premier had no regard for principle in the conduct of public business. He (Mr. Herdman) suggested, as a way out of the difficulty, that the amount owing to the Financial Adviser at presentbe paid, his six months’ salary in lieu of notice, and that the vote on the Estimates be reduced accordingly.

On a division the motion for reduction was lost by 27 to 18. Mr, Allen moved the reduction of the vote by £398. This was lost by 27 to IS. Mr. Massey then moved the reduction by £397. , Sir Joseph Ward, in reply to Mr. Guthrie, said that he was doing the right and proper thing. He would sittill the Day "of Judgment if necessary to carry the vote. Those who opposed the vote put themselves in the position, of being party to a breach of faith with the ex-High Commissioner. Mr. Allen said that the whole trouble was that the opposition to the vote was an indication that the office should be abolished. If the Premier gave an assurance that all he wanted was sufficient money to carry out liabilities, then that would settle the matter. Unless .there was an assurance that theposition of Financial Adviser be discontinued, those who voted for ilieretention of the vote voted for th» continuance of this office. The motion was lost in division by 2G votes to 19. Mr Dive then moved a reduction! by £396, - . , Mr. Massey suggested that progress be reported. He objected to the veto being re-inserted when such a stnalL number of members were present, ands many of whom desired to get home for, Christmas.

Sir Joseph Ward said he was not responsible for the members who wereaway. He had carried out the constitutional practice. Under these circumstances he could not see his way to agree to Mr. Massey’s suggestion, When the time came he would move the necessary adjournment over the holidays, but he desired to get rid of as many of the 397 divisions as possible. The Financial Adviser had to receive six months’ notice, and he was. quite prepared when that lapsed to give the House an opportunity to say whether the office should be continued.

Mr. Massey said that he had no doubt that in a full House the vote would not be carried. He was quite agreeable to pay Mr. Reeves all ho had earned, and to vote the necessary amount, but could not agree to the whole vote simply to please the Premier. Mr. Davey said he was satisfied with. Sir Joseph* Ward’s statement, and suggested a compromise on the lines laid down by the Premier. Mr. Herries suggested that the vote be reduced by £1 as an indication of the promise made by the Premier to allow the House a chance next year to abolish the office if it so desired. Sir Joseph. Ward further explained what he was prepared to do, and -recapitulated the position in regard to the vote. If the present stonewall continued he would after a while ask the. House to adjourn over the .and come-back..thereafter’ to conclude, the -business.. He was -not; responsible* for the present position in theHouse.v He would in June next year give the House an opportunity to reconsider the matter. The discussion was continued till 5.30 p.m., when the House adjourned till 7.30 p.m. [No message of the evening Bitting has reached the'office of this * ;