Parliament Crimes Bill Referred To House Committee (Press, 24 September 1959)
This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: Parliament Crimes Bill Referred To House Committee (Press, 24 September 1959)
On 23 September 1959, Prime Minister Mr. Nash successfully secured the House of Representatives' agreement to grant a second reading of the Crimes Bill without debate, allowing it to proceed directly to the Statutes Revision Committee. This move indicated the likelihood of a redraft of the bill, particularly regarding certain contentious clauses—most notably those related to sodomy and possibly capital punishment. Outside Parliament, Minister of Justice Mr. Mason clarified that the current draft of the Crimes Bill does not legalise sodomy between consenting adults, as some had suggested. He stated that provisions would be revised to eliminate any potential misinterpretations, insisting that the previous laws would remain untouched and punishable by a prison term of up to three years for related offences. In a separate discussion within the House, Mr. D. C. Seath, representing the Opposition, raised concerns about the Land and Income Tax Amendment Bill. He argued that the bill grants excessive discretion to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue, without providing taxpayers the right to appeal against decisions, potentially leaving individuals without recourse to challenge the commissioner's determinations. Seath emphasised that this could unfairly restrict taxpayers who deserve the opportunity to present their cases to higher authorities. Additionally, Mr. W. W. Freer brought the Minister of Labour's attention to a plan by the Fletcher Organisation aimed at constructing a leasehold and development scheme for factory premises in Auckland and Christchurch. Freer inquired whether existing Labour legislation would allow for the inclusion of shared facilities, such as communal cafeterias and medical clinics, intended for use by multiple tenants, similar to arrangements in Scotland. He urged Mr. Hackett to consider adjusting the legislation to facilitate the implementation of such services, potentially lowering capital costs for establishing small industrial sites.
Important Information
The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact
The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand