PARLIAMENT Heated Argument Delays Debate On Address

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29251, 8 July 1960, Page 14

PARLIAMENT Heated Argument Delays Debate On Address

(New Zeeland Preu Association) WELLINGTON, July 7. The Address-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives was interrupted for 25 minutes tonight while members heatedly interjected and rose in rapid succession to make points of order. Mr J. R. Hanan (Opposition, Invercargill) had just resumed his seat after devoting 20 minutes of his half-hour speech to an attack on Government policy and the Prime Minister, when Mr Nash rose on a point of order, claiming he had been misrepresented and his integrity had been challenged. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Holyoake), rising to speak on the point of order, was hotly challenged by Government front-benchers.

Addressing sat speaser, mr j Holyoake said: *‘There will be no 1 hearing from the Prime Minister. , If he can’t keep his Ministers in 1 some semblance of order then he 1 won’t be heard.” , Mr Nash: I have said I have ] been misrepresented. I know what this misrepresentation was, j and I said my integrity has been . challenged. I have not been j misrepresented in any speech in < this debate. I was misrepresented * in a speech which a former , speaker quoted. Mr Speaker defined a member’s j right to speak, if he thought his ] integrity had been impugned, , under the Standing Orders. Mr Holyoake said the procedure ] should be used sparingly and ( carefully. He thought he knew , what the Prime Minister wanted , to say, and he believed it did ( not come within the scope of the , Standing Orders. Mr Speaker allowed the Prime , Minister to make a defence on j what he alleged was an attack on , his integrity, and Mr Nash said that Mr Hanan had quoted only , rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrirrir- 1

part of what he had said on an earlier occasion. “It (the quotation) meant I was saying to the people I would take their money and spend it better than they could,” he said. He claimed it was only part of what he bad said, and that it had misrepresented his speech. Mr Holyoake suggested the Prime Minister had raised the point of misrepresentation and nothing else, and he asked Mr Speaker if it was an example of what could be properly raised under.the Standing Orders. Mr Speaker: I cannot give a ruling on the spur of the moment I would like to give further consideration to the matter. The debate resumed with the Minister of Housing (Mr Fox) saying: “It is a pity the former speaker should have spent 20 minutes trying to assassinate the character of the Prime Minister . . ." Mr Holyoake: Is the House to permit a Minister to say a member was assassinating somebody’s character? Mr Speaker: He can’t say that, and he must withdraw the remark. Both the Postmaster-General (Mr Moohan) and Mr Holyoake rose to points of order before Mr Fox resumed his speech.