DELEGATE OR DICTATOR?

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 147, 22 June 1923, Page 9

DELEGATE OR DICTATOR?

MINISTER'S REPLY TO LABOUR'S

DEMAND.

(By Telegraph.— Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON*, Thursday.

The Minister of Internal Affairs, the Hon. W. D. Stewart, replied to-night in the House to Labour's contention that Mr. Massey should go to the Imperial Conferences as a tied delegate and to Labour's plea for the abolition of secret diplomacy. Mr. Massey's mission, the Minister said, would be a very special one and of peculiar importance, and it was obvious that if the Prime Minister had to attend pledged on all points he might as well stay at home. Mr. Holland appeared to overlook the fact that any arrangement involving the Dominion would have to be ratified by Parliament. There were a thousand and one questions that might crop up, and it would be impossible to instruct the Premier on all of them. Certain confidential information would he placed before the Conference, and if the Imperial Government insisted that they should remain confidential, surely no objection could be taken to that. On the majority of questions it would only be possible for Mr. Massey to exercise his vote intelligently after he had heard all the information. The speaker could not agree altogether with the condemnation of secret diplo' maey. Even President Wilson, a pronounced advocate of open diplomacy, admitted that secrecy was essential during negotiation stages. Mr. Holland ■wanted to democratise the diplomatic service, but the more they did that the more were they likely to hring about serious international difficulties. Members of Parliament were delegated with certain powers by their constituents — they were not instructed on every point —and in a wider sphere the pame principle should apply to the Prime Minister. If delegates went to the Conference with fixed opinions the Conference would be rendered useless.