The Press SATURDAY, JULY 6, 1968. Mr Kirk Defends Speech On Steps

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31724, 6 July 1968, Page 38

The Press SATURDAY, JULY 6, 1968. Mr Kirk Defends Speech On Steps

(New Zealand Frees Association) WELLINGTON, July 5. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) today made a special statement in Parliament denying that he had incited demonstrators at last week’s opening of Parliament to disobey the rule of law.

His statement was made after a speech by Mr H. E. L. Pickering (Nat., Rangiora) during the Address-in-Reply debate.

was on the steps when Labour representatives advised the demonstrators to disperse,” said Mr Douglas. Mr D. J. Riddiford (Nat., Wellington Central) attacked Mr Kirk’s statement to the demonstrators from the steps of Parliament. The Speaker's rulings stated that it was highly unconstitutional to speak disrespectfully of any high court judge, Mr Riddiford said.

Mr Pickering said that Mr Kirk’s presence with the demonstrators at the foot of the steps leading into Parliament Buildings was in direct contrast with his comments made earfier in the Address-in-Reply debate that he believed in conciliation and arbitration and the rule of law.

House, the Speaker (Mr Jack) advised Mr Pickering to use restraint but said he did not think his comments were disorderly. When the House resumed Mr Kirk sought leave to make a statement on a question of his honour and integrity. “The member who has just concluded his speech said that my action had indicated defiance of law and order and caused unrest” said Mr Kirk. He said he and his colleagues had urged the demonstrators as strongly as they would to demonstrate by constitutional means and to disperse. “We urged them to disperse so they would not interfere with the opening of Parliament” said Mr Kirk. Mr N. V. Douglas (Lab., Auckland Central) said there were as many National M.P.s as Labour M.P.s on the steps of Parliament during the demonstration. “The Leader of the Opposition informed the demonstrators that the answer to their problem lay in arbitration and conciliation and in no other course. “The member for Rangiora

Mr Kirk had implied that the Arbitration Court system was not just, he said. “What Mr Kirk said was definitely of an inflammatory nature,” he said. Mr Riddiford said university students and others took over the space in front of the building when the trade unionists had peacefully dispersed. “A number of these students and others, either by accident or design, or spontaneously under expert guidance, came into the space which should have been held clear for the guard of honour. “I suggest as the member for Wellington Central—and after all the university is in the city—that this was a deplorable incident. I hope there is no recurrence of it and that the work many students have done to improve the relations with the citizens of Wellington will not be undone.” Mrs W. M. Tirikatene-Sulli-van (Lab., Southern Maori) dismissed Mr Riddiford’s claims that students were to blame for the incident

Mr Pickering said Mr Kirk did nothing to disperse the demonstration and implied that his presence there encouraged it. Just before the luncheon adjournment, Mr Kirk rose to a point of order. He said it was improper and incorrect for Mr Pickering to impute that his actions and words urged opposition to the rule of law and incited violence.

Mr Pickering said he was merely drawing the attention of the Opposition to the consequence of their action in addressing the demonstrators. Before adjourning the

“To generalise from a particular incident is so illogical it can only be dismissed,” she said. “To speak of all students as elements of discord and disorder is fallacious.” Mrs Tirikatene-Sullivan said the right of people to protest in an orderly way against legislation must be preserved. If it had not been for the various protests of the Maori people, their rights would not be what they were today.