MR BRAY AND THE LABOUR PARTY

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22496, 2 September 1938, Page 7

MR BRAY AND THE LABOUR PARTY

TO THE EBITOB OF THE PEESS. Sir, —An appreciation of the value of your space forbids my replying fully to all the questions raised by “Bonnie Play.” I will content myself with a few. On my motion, the Woolston branch was unanimous in sending the following remit to conference.

OBJECTIVE

That as productive processes depend more on the increased application of solar power and inventive science than on human labour and tend to become more so in the future, the objective of the party be simplified by altering it to read as follows:

“That delivery to everyone of all the goods and services desired, as and when required, and with the least effort to anyone.”

And further, that this definition of an objective be brought to the notice of the Labour organisations throughout the world with the suggestion that inherent in this objective is the right of the individual to refuse work, without prejudice to his share in the objective, unless the work offered is connected with the production of goods and services for the benefit of individuals. (See Agenda No. 1, page 13).

All the words after “the least effort to anyone” were left out in the agenda paper circulated to branches. The following is the letter which I circulated in the conference, together with the full context of six remits from the two branches I represented. "The Labour Party is pledged to bring about the betterment of the conditions of life in Now Zealand in an orderly manner through the sanction of the people at the ballot box. The party is pledged to trust the intelligence of the people. That being so it stands to reason that the parly ui flaming the policy which it proposes to submit for endorsement by the people, is bound to allow within its own organisation the fullest opportunity for its own members to come to an intelligent dccision on any question which is to be submitted to the larger intelligence of the electorate. The party puts itself into the position of offering to be the servant of the people in obtaining the results desired bv the majority of the people. In the same way the executive of the party is the servant of the members of the party. It is the prerogative of the members to decide on democratic principles the policy of the party, and it is the duty of the executive as servants to carry out that policy. No servant has the right to alter or abridge remits to conference in such a way that the meaning or purpose of a remit is distorted, mutilated, or obscured so that members in their branch meetings are unable to give their delegates intelligent instructions. The work of conference is delayed in making clear to delegates what would have been o.uite clear to all memhbers in their branches had remits been circulated as sent in. Compare these remits as they appear here with what appears in the agenda paper. Aie you prepared to insist that the business of the party be conducted on democratic lines and above suspicion? "As delegate for Woolston and Southbridge branches. I am adopting this method of vindicsting the rights of individual members through, and with the support of. their branches, to obtain the impartial consideration of c °n fel h encc " r their views in the interests of‘ the Jmembers as a whole. 1 do so in older - ho the time of this conference and. I hope, of future conferences.”

The public know now that the conference preferred to reaffirm the old objective When I was making my protest from the floor of conference about the way in which the remit had been dealt with and stressing the point that the remit could not receive the intelligent consideration of all members of branches, the Minister for Education interjected from the platform. “Why not be intelligent now. I leave it to the intelligence of the public to judge whether the Labour Party as a Government is serving the people intelligently, that is. Wltl l * view to continuing in their jobs, ine public can also judge which is .the more intelligent objective. I might add that the Hon. Adam Hamilton, from the public platform at Leeston, agreed with this definition of objective, though since then he has taken no steps specifically to adopt it. Yours, etc ” W. B. BRAY. August 31, 1938.