BILL ATTACKED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 93, 20 April 1932, Page 9

BILL ATTACKED.

MR. HOLLAND'S DENUNCIATION SUPPRESSION OP MEETINGS. "ACCENTUATING DANGER." (By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day. A declaration that the Labour party would not tolerate interference with its meetings to demand the resignation of the Government was made by Mr. H. E. Holland, Leader of the Opposition, when attacking the provisions of the Public Safety Conservation Bill. Referring to the Auckland trouble, Mr. Holland said an orderly meeting was called to protest against the Government's policy, and trouble developed out of it. Thousands of young people had never had a chance of doing any work. The Government left them to stand on the street corner, and any student of psychology would know what would occur ui.der conditions of excitement. There was always a criminal element to take advantage of such a situation. Seeing that it was his own Government's policy which was responsible for the riot, Sir. A. J. Stallworthy (Coalition, Eden) should agree to the Government paying compensation to those shopkeepers with whom it sympathised.

Mr. Stall worthy: It, would be fairer if the Labour party paid them. Mr. Holland suggested that the bill, where jt was not "panicky," was provocative. The Government was proposing to censor all opposition to its wagereduction policy and to hold workers down to coolie conditions. There was ample power in the Crimes Act for the suppression of disorder and the prevention of unlawful assemblies, and further power was incorporated in the Police Offences Act. Mr. Holland declared that under the bill Mr. Forbes was taking power to suppress the meetings of his political opponents. Mr. Coates: Rubbish! Last Sunday's Domain Meeting. Mr. Holland said it was foolish and stupid to suppress the safety valve of the nation. Other countries had recognised that. The most stupid and criminal thing that could have been done was that someone with authority should have prohibited the holding of a meeting at Auckland last Sunday. What if the meeting had been transferred to Queen Street instead of to the Domain. The best plan Mr. Forbes could pursue was to give the utmost freedom of speech. Once an attempt were made to suppress all meetings, Mr. Forbes would drive the whole of the opposition to the Government underground, and accentuate the dangerous atmosphere already created by the Government's own policy. "The Labour party," Mr. Holland declared, "will not tolerate interference with the meetings it holds to demand the resignation of the Government. (Government laughter.) It may bo laughter for the Government, but it is not for the people." Evidence Clause Attacked. Mr. Holland said that thousands of erstwhile supporters of the Government were among those demanding its resignation. Ho vigorously attacked the clause in the bill dealing with the evidence on which a man could be convicted, and said that while the rules of evidence applied to a burglar, a murderer and a child-ravisher, they did not apply to ihe man who might be arrested under this bill. Window-smashing and looting were unjustifiable, and such actions could only give the would-be dictators of the country recourse to more drastic measures than they would otherwise think of. He reiterated Labour's demand that the only remedy was the provision of work, and, failing that, the payment of sustenance on a cash basis.