EMPHATIC DENIAL

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 131, 27 February 1929, Page 12

EMPHATIC DENIAL

RUMOURED SPLIT IN LABOUR PARTY

FORMATION OF MODERATE , GROUP “NOT TITTLE OF TRUTH IN IT” Rumours given publicity in a Christchurch newspaper of a split in the Labour Party were emphatically denied by high officials.of the movement in Wellington yesterday. “There is not a tittle of truth in the statements. They are utter rubbishjust a silly canard —and someone’s imagination has been worthing overtime,” was the summing up of the secretary of the Parliamentary Labour Party. (Mr. P. Fraser).

The statement as published was that moderate members of the Labour Barty, Chafing under its leadership, were withdrawing from the Labour ranks, names connected with the supposed schism being those of Messrs. W. L. Martin (Raglan), W. J. Jordan (Manukau), F. Livingstone (Walmarino), J. W. Munro (Dunedin North), and E. J. Howard (Christchurch South). Mr. Fraser, after making the declaration quoted above, went on to say that there were no more loyal members of the party than ‘those named. They had proved their loyalty by many years of service to Labour. Mr. H. E. Holland’s re-election to the leadership of the party for the life of the present ’ Parliament, which took place during the recent brief session, had not only been unanimous but enthusiastic, those present uniting, in eulogising his work for the movement and the party.

Could Not Dream of It.

In endorsing the statements of Mr. Fraser, the secretary of the New Zealand Labour Party (Mr. W. Nash) said that headquarters in Wellington would be the first to learn of any such dissension. He had never heard the slightest suggestion of it, and he could not- possibly dream of anything of the kind happening, as the members mentioned were in constant touch with the national office as late as yesterday. “What better evidence of repudiation can be given,” Mr. Nash added, “than the letter I have just received from Mr. Jordan, intimating that, he would be attending the national conference. ‘I will see you then unless you come north before that,’ Mr. Jordan adds.”

“Something of a Joke.”

Interviewed in Christchurch, Mr. E. J. Howard described the story as being something of a joke. "The suggestions made are possible, but extremely improbable,” he said. . “Mr. Jordan may have changed his opinions since his trip to Canada and Great Britain, but in my opinion he has not the slightest idea of breaking away from us., Mr. Martin has not given any indication of being in any way at loggerheads with the. party. If anything has developed, lately with the Country Party—which I can hardly imagine—it is unknown to me, and I am one of the party whips. It is frankly a joke, I will say, to think of Mr, Langstone leaving the Labour Party. I simply can’t imagine it.” Mr. ;J. McCombs, M.P., agreed with Mr. Howard. “I should think that there is nothing at all in it,” he said. “I certainly have heard no suggestion or rumour of such a thing happening. In my opinion, there is no degree of probability in the idea at all.”

Mr. Munro's Denial.

Mr. ■J. W. Munro, interviewed at Dunedin, said he knew nothing of the development alleged. “This is the first I have heard of it,” he said. “I have not had time tb get into communication with the three party members reported to be leaders in the moderate movement, but I Intend communicating with them at once to ascertain the true position. • There is no truth whatever in the report that Tam allied with the hew group; moreover, there is no likelihood of its being truthful. When I was in Wellington for the short session the party was very solid, with good spirit .and feeling among its members. I think this report has been based on man-in-the-street rumours. There has been'nd talk of dissension over’the leadership of the party. Mr. Holland was elected practically Unanimously by the party, and no suggestion of hostility has been advanced by any member of the party.”

PARTY MEMBERS PROFESS IGNORANCE Dominion Special Service. Auckland, February 26.

Referring to the reported split in the Labour Party, Mr. M. J. Savage, M.P., said it was news to him. He had heard nothing of any such movement and was inclined to discredit the report because prior to the short session of Parliament Mr. Holland was re-elected as leader unanimously. So far as the leadership was concerned, there was generally one man who stood out above alt others, and that was the case with Mr. Holland with respect to the Labour Party. Mr. W. J. Jordan, M.P., -also disclaimed knowledge of any cave in the party. There was no such fundamental divergence as would call for the formation of a moderate group outside the party.