A PLEA FOE UNITY

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23394, 30 July 1941, Page 4

A PLEA FOE UNITY

INDEPENDENT’S VIEW NATIONAL GOVERNMENT URGED (PH.) WELLINGTON, July 29. A vigorous appeal for a cessation of wrangling, the sinking of party differences, and the formation of a national government for a united prosecution of the war, was made by Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Independent, Egmont), when he spoke in the Budget debate in the House of Representatives to-night. Mr Wilkinson deplored the tone of Government members in resisting apI proaches by the Opposition for unity, I and declared that it would be a national disaster if the Government persisted with its intention to hold a general election; He suggested, that if it was found impossible to form a national government, then Parliament should extend its life for the duration of the war, and strengthen the personnel of the War Cabinet, and increase its powers. From the trend of the debate, said Mr Wilkinson, it seemed that there was an utter failure on the part of the Government speakers to realise the gravity of the war situation. Government members: We realise it all right. Continuing, Mr Wilkinson said there had been a determined effort by Government speakers to prevent any movement for unity in Parliament. The country felt that Parliament had not lived up to very high expectations by the public. The shadow of war was 1000 miles nearer with the threat from the East, and yet Parliament was toying and playing with things of no moment. “Why should we.fret and fume about party differences in face of the grave situation confronting us?” he asked. The danger was coming closer and closer to New Zealand every day, and there was a need to pause in domestic strife, and prepare for an emergency. As a member without party bias, he did not care twopence who ran the country, so long as it was run properly, said Mr Wilkinson. A Government member: It is. Mr Wilkinson; I have seen no signs of statesmanship lately. It seems that the welfare of party comes first every time. ' The cleavage in the ranks of the Labour Party had accentuated party bitterness, he continued. The public was not'concerned with petty quarrels in ; the House, but it was concerned with lists of casualties in the newspapers. He wished, therefore, to suggest a course of action that would make members of Parliament one, instead of divided as at present. "It does not concern me what was said a week ago, or a month ago,” said Mr Wilkinson. “I am concerned about what is said now. We seem to be living on past happenings,” 1 In his opinion a great disservice had been rendered to the House by the member for Onehunga in his attack on the member for Grey Lynn. The member for Grey Lynn had not descended to a low level. His speech hqd been of high order. The remarks of the Minister for Railways about the Leader of the Opposition were not helpful. Slighting references to people on the other side were undignified and uncalled for. An Election “Destructive” Mr Wilkinson said that in the ordinary course of events the country would be on the eve of a general election. He hoped that one would not take place, and judging by the Waitemata by-election, it would be a national disaster. After a general election, the country would never be united again, and Waitemata should be an object lesson that the country wanted no more of quarrelling. An election would be wastetul, costly, and destructive. Unity was what was needed now. Mr A. S. Richards (Government, Roskill): Teach that to the Opposition. Mr Wilkinson; I am sure that members of the Opposition are more amenable to reason than some Government members. It was by no means certain that a general election would confirm the Labour Party in office. If the country was called upon to face an election it would show its displeasure at the expense of those who brought it about. The Minister for Internal Affairs (the Hon. W. E. Parry): What is the alternative? Mr Wilkinson: I’ll come to that in a moment. Was it fair to soldiers overseas that the country should proceed to an election in their absence? aisked Mr Wilkinson, who said he was convinced that the country did not want an election. From the rank and file of the Labour movement there came defiance. In shouting that an election must be held they were directing their speeches not against the Opposition, but against members of the Ministry. It was unfortunate that the Prime Minister was out of the country. On his return he should declare an allparty Government for the duration - of the war. He would get the support of the Opposition, and the great majority of i his own side. If a national go* vernment did not get on well, ne could appeal to the country, and would sweep the polls on the issue, to, prosecute the war vigorously. "If a national government is not possible,’-’ said Mr Wilkinson, “Parliament could postpone the general election for the duration of the war, and enlarge the scope and power of the War Cabinet. While an election is pending how • can the Leader of the Opposition be expected to join the War Cabinet? If this course were adopted, there could be a complete truce.” ■ -' , Mr Wilkinson said there had been talk of a referendum to determine whether Parliament’s life should be extended. It was a foolish suggestion. Parliament should courageously decide for itself. It was an obvious duty.