Methodists Adhere To Vietnam Stand

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30901, 6 November 1965, Page 16

Methodists Adhere To Vietnam Stand

Efforts to “tone down” a motion regretting the Government’s action in sending combat troops to Vietnam resulted in a vigorous one-hour debate at the annual conference of the Methodist Church last evening.

An amendment, intended to remove what was described as a “tone of censure” from the motion, was finally defeated in a 143-138 vote. The motion in its original form was then carried on voices.

The motion, contained in the report from the international affairs committee, was “that conference regrets the action of the New Zealand Government in sending a combat unit to Vietnam, because it believes that New Zealand’s role should be to provide economic, technical and medical aid to this area.”

The Rev. M. Dine (Palmerston North) moved an amendment substituting “necessity” for “action.” “I move this be-

cause I do feel that it is nearer the truth, in that New Zealand was, I believe, forced into the decision because of her association with other nations, in pacts such as A.N.Z.U.S. and 5.E.A.T.0.,” he said. Sharp Division

In the discussion which followed, there was a sharp division between speakers who wanted a “strong” statement and those who wanted it amended. Mr F. M. Souster (Auckland) said that if the original motion was meant to censure the Government, then as a loyal New Zealand citizen he would have to vote for the amendment. “I am sorry that this matter has been discussed in the way it has throughout New Zealand.”

Mr C. R. Howells (Auckland) said that as “a poor citizen of the country” he felt the Government should be cen-

sured for aligning itself with United States policy. It would be a sorry day if the Church got into the position where it would not criticise the Government at all, said the Rev. D. B. Gordon (Central Mission, Dunedin). Mr Dine withdrew his amendment in favour of one from the Rev. L. T. Norwell (Woolston), which regretted that the Government “felt it necessary” to send troops. The Rev. K. Russell (Waipara) was “dismayed” that conference was trying to “dilute” a strong statement. Tn my opinion this conference should not go to extremes to placate the Government,” he said. Motion Carried The amendment was then defeated and the motion carried. The vice-president of the conference (Mr R. T. Garlick) commended the speakers for the spirit of the debate, even though there was “complete opposition.” Further motions deploring the suffering and loss of life in the war; condemning the use of “atrocity” weapons and the bombing of dams; urging the Government to help ensure the opportunity for the Vietnamese to elect a government “of their own choosing”; and supporting constructive efforts at reconciliation, were carried without discussion.