DRAMATIC END

Auckland Star, Volume LXXV, Issue 64, 16 March 1944, Page 4

DRAMATIC END

DEBATE IN THE HOUSE

STAND BY OPPOSITION

(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day.

The Address-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives collapsed dramatically yesterday afternoon. On Tuesday night the indications were that the debate would extend into another week, but during yesterday morning it became known that the Opposition did not intend putting up further speakers that afternoon unless Ministers of the Crown entered the debate.

The first speaker when the debate was resumed yesterday was Miss Howard (Govt., Christchurch East), and when she concluded no Opposition speaker rose. Then the mover of the Address-in-Reply motion, Mr. Connolly (Govt., Dunedin West) made a brief closing speech, thus precluding any further contributions from either side of the House. Stating that apparently it was the wish of the House that the Address-in-Reply debate should be terminated that afternoon, the Prime Minister, Mr. Fraser, moved that the House adjourn until 7.30 in the evening. "Can we have some indication from the Government as to the future business of the session?" asked the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Holland, who added that the Address-in-Reply debate had lasted three weeks. He asked whether the Government was going to give the House any work to do and whether the Government had any programme of legislation to introduce. Mr. Clyde Carr (Govt., Timaru): You are springing a trap. "We of the Opposition have come here to do the country's business, retorted Mr. Holland. "The Government's job is to provide us with that business." Mr. Holland repeated his request for information regarding the length of the session and as to the nature of the legislation to be introduced. "I am so delighted at the saving of the country's time by the Opposition, in refraining from putting up further speakers in the debate," said the Prime Minister, "that I think the House is entitled to a little time to consider the situation that has arisen—and I propose to take that time." ~ . Mr. Fraser said a- bill would be introduced that evening providing for paid annual holidays. The proposal was in the programme of both parties, and he was sure there would be such unanimity that the bill would go through in one evening.

"Strong Silent Ministers" An outstanding feature of the debate was the small number of front bench speakers who took part. There were only five, three from the Opposition, comprising Mr. Holland, Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Goosman, and two from the Government, the Minister of Supply (Mr. Sullivan) and the member of the Executive Council for the native race- (Mr. Tirikatene). When the debate unexpectedly ended, 52 members had contributed speeches, 25 from the Opposition and 27 from the Government side. The total possible contribution from the Opposition was 33. National members who did not speak were Messrs. Massey (Franklin), Algie (Remuera), W. Sullivan (Bay of Plenty), Broadfoot (Waitomo), Hamilton (Wallace), Holyoake (Pahiatua), Poison (Stratford) and Doidge (Tauranga).

Pointed attention was drawn on Tuesday evening by an Opposition speaker, Mr. Sheat (Patea) to the silence of Ministers of the Crown. He said the people were anxious to hear Ministerial explanations on industrial troubles, the prospects of coal supplies, electric power supply, rehabilitation, housing, a new deal for farmers, plans for education and defence matters. Not one of the Ministers concerned had spoken. It seemed, he said, that they were endeavouring to establish for themselves a reputation for strong, silent statesmanship.