LABOUR PARTY.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19910, 23 April 1930, Page 10

LABOUR PARTY.

no-confidence motions, decisions of conference. tatsss 4SBOCUTXOI .TKJMHMH') WELLINGTON, April 22. The election of officers, consideration Remits relative to the constitution, and the adoption of , reports oonstituted the business transacted to-day at' the annual conference of the New Zealand Labour Party, which is being held daily in the Trades Hall.

The election of officers resulted aa follows•••—President. Mr J. Thorn (reelected) ; vice-president, the Rev. J, K. Archer (re-elected}: secretary and treasurer, Mr W. Nash, M.P. (reelected): divisional area executive, Messrs M. J. Savage, M.P., W. E. Barnard, M.P., J. S. Montgomerie, W. J. Rogers, J. Whittle, W. Taylor, T. Parfitt, F. R. Cooke, J. R. ■ Snedden, F. Jones, and J. Alsweiler. The conference adopted the - annual report of the Parliamentary Labour Party, and on the motion of Mr 'F. R. Cooke, seconded by Mr M. Fagan, the following resolution was carried: "That this conference, having received the report of the Parliamentary Labour Party, records it# appreciation of the magnificent work of its members during the past year, and in particular its splendid efforts on benall of the unemployed, and expresses continued confidence' in the members ol the Party in Parliament." According to the official report ot the proceedings, the motion wascarried, Mr T. Kennedy dissenting as » protest against the conference deciding to vote without further discussion.' . j Referring to the Labour no-con-fidence amendment ' concerning the ! salaries of public servants, the report explained that prior to the Party com? ing to a decision on the, proposals it i would plaoe before the House, its cxe- j cutive met representatives of- the executives of the various Public Service organisations, when ultimately the Labour amendment was drafted. The report added that it embodied what the representative)), of the Public Servants had agreed would be satisfactory to their organisations. Defending the attitude of the Party toward the Reform no-confidence amendment, the report; stated: "We took up the attitude that we could vote for the rejection of" the primage duty if no other issue were Involved, but the Government's land and incojne tax proposals were to some extent in line with: the > Labour Party'® policy. J and we were not prepared to vote thew] out. Besides, the main question involved was not either the primage duty or the land and income taxes. The decision that had to be made on the no* confidence motion was; whether the La- j bour Party was to place the. Reform Party back on the Government benches. In view of the Reform Party's past legislative and administrative record. and the i people's emphatic rejection of both that Party and its policy in 1928. we were not at that stage prepared to take responsibility of placing Mr Coates and his supporters back in office; consequently, 'we voted' against the. amendment, which was de*; feated by 4& votes to 24 "It is understood this is a ary to.the abolition of compulsory nsl% tary trainine," said the report? in deal-' inc with tlie decent cancellation of trnlitarv camps pending the meeting of Parliament. "If .that is the case, it will represent su>vfritorv for the Labour movement, which has advocated the abolition of forced militarism from its/ inception." v - , .j ■