[ATTITUDE TO DEFENCE

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22464, 27 July 1938, Page 12

[ATTITUDE TO DEFENCE

MR POLSON ATTACKS THE GOVERNMENT CHANGE IN SANCTIONS BILL RECALLED [From Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, July 26. The Government’s attitude toward defence was criticised by Mr W. J. Poison (National, Stratford) during the financial debate in the House of Representatives to-night. “I, for one, am not content to entrust the defence of this country to a party that ignores the necessity for sending men overseas in a time of extremity,” said Mr Poison. There was, said Mr Poison, belated recognition in the Budget of the necessity for home defence. However, he had looked in vain for any recognition of obligations overseas. The next war would not be found in New Zealand—lt would be over before the victor arrived here to collect the spoils. ”1 know that some members of the present Government refused to go to the war.” said Mr Poison. ‘T think it takes some courage to act as some of them did. It takes courage for a man to stand up for >his principles. "These men who don't believe in men going" overseas are in charge of the defence of this country,” Mr Poison continued. “They have insisted that no one will go overseas to assist in the defence of the Empire. I have recollections of their attitude toward an economic sanctions bill, a measure dealing with economic sanctions concerning Italy’s attitude in Abyssinia. I remember that the then Prime Minister (Mr Forbes) did what every other Prime Minister in the Empire did—he took a copy of the bill along to the Opposition, and said; ’We want to be unanimous.’ Ido not know the exact details of the conversation; but I judge that the Prime Minister said it would be pretty rotten if the bill were not passed unanimously. Then the Opposition insisted on a change in the bill before agreeing to support it, and an alteration was made that there would.be no compulsory service nor service overseas. “Here is a party in charge of the defence of the country that insisted. 1 on the insertion of a clause that no one should go overseas, and then has the hardihood to send to Geneva a man who humiliated Britain because she had not embroiled the Empire in regard to Italy’s attitude to Abyssinia. The Hon. W. E. Parry: It is a wonder you did not go to the war. Mr Poison: At least I did not skulk behind prison'bars. Mr W J- Lyon (Government, Waitemata): Where did you skulk? . . .. “I am expressing my own opinion, said Mr Poison; “but I say quite definitely that I, for one, am not content to entrust the defence of this country to a party that ignores the necessity for sending men overseas in time or extremity.” . . . Mr Parry; You are in favour of sending other people.