BITTER OPPOSITION

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 74, 28 March 1931, Page 10

BITTER OPPOSITION

LABOUR HITS OUT

"GAGSTER GOVERNMENT"

In the face of bitter opposition from the Labour Party, the Prime Minister in the House of to-day moved his amendment to the Standing Orders providing for the introduction of the closure. Mr. Forbes moved for urgency for the closure proposal and for the passage of the Finance Bill through all its stages. The motion' was put in two parts, each being carried, the first by 44 votes to 20 and the second by 47 votes to 20. Mr. J. T. Hogan (Independent, Eangitikei) voted on each occasion with the Labour Party. Various points of order wero raised by Mr. J. M f Combs (Labour, Lyttelton). Mr. Speaker ruled that sufficient notico of motion had been given by the Prime Minister, that no amendments consequent on the amended Standing Orders were necessary until after the motion had been carried, and that the motion should be dealt with by the House and not in Committee, unless the Prime Minister decided on the latter course. OBJECT OF THE KEVISION. Mr. Forbes referred to the revision of the Standing Orders about two years ago, and pointed out that they were altered in order to cut down the hours of sitting to reasonable limits and to relieve the strain on members' health imposed by long hours. The Leader of the Labour' Party had been one of those who had protested against long hours affecting his health and the health of other members. The Govcrnmeit; had found, however, that it was necessary to provide some means of getting the business of the House done, for the Standing Orders wero being used to hinder legislation and to defeat the object in view when the hours were shortened. Ho did not think a single member would not agree the time had arrived when a means of closing'a debate was necessary. Even those who spoke loudest against the proposal must feel in their minds that the time was ripe for something to be done. "The Stauding Orders have broken down absolutely," ho added. Labour voices in eliorus: "No." Mr. Forbes expressed regret at the step he was taking, but said that it appeared Home members could not enter into-the spirit in which the Standing Orders wore revised, and that the Standing Orders would not stand up to the test without the closure provision, Mr. B! Semple (Labour, Wellington Bast): "Wo will stand up to it all right. 3' "NOTHING NEW." "This proposal is nothing new," said Mr. Forbes. "All the other Dominion Parliaments have it. So far ] we in Now Zealand have been able to get along with that spirit of sweet reasonableness which always lias been a characteristic of the members of tho House." In an ordinary session such a proposal was not so necessary, but he had brought down urgent emergency legislation, and ho objected to "all this fiddling while Koine is burning" u-liilo it was under consideration, and felt it was time they got clown to business. The Labour members who had taken part in the long delay this week would agrpo in their minds that it was better to do things in a businesslike way. Mr. F. Langsfone (Ty.ihour, Wtiininrino): "That is only slobber." USED BY LABOUR IN AUSTRALIA. The Prime- Minister pointed out that only the olhcr 'l;iy tlm rlosurr was applied in tho Australian L'Vdrnil I'avliii

ment. That was an examplo of one of the Labour Primo Ministers using tho closure to enable debate to be terminated. Mr. W. E, Parry (Labour, Auckland Central): "The Tories put it there." "I don't think, therefore, that any good Labour man can oppose it," Mr. Forbes added. "The Labour Government in Australia look upon it as a necessary piece of machinery to enable business to be done. .. A great deal depends upon the way in which tho closure provision is administered. As long as I am in this position, whether it bo long or short, members can rely on it being administered sympathetically. I will always endeavour to preserve the right of tho fullest discussion, and I will give members every opportunity of expressing their views in regard to any measure. But I will certainly do my best to prevent needless repetition and drawing ont of debate." ECONOMY ADVANTAGES. Ho went on to refer to the need for curtailing talk in the House as a measure of economy, and added that ho hoped the proposal would be tho moans of reducing the size of "Hansard.' The expense of Parliament was too great to permit members to record their views in "Hansard" merely to enable them to point out their printed speeches to their constituents. "I was very_ disappointed," said the Prime Minister, "at the way the Labour Party met this proposal." Mr. Seinple: "Crocodile tears." Tho challenge had been thrown out by tho Labour Party in the last few days, said Mr.. Forbes, that he would not be able to do business this session, and therefore they could not have expected -him to take any other course. The Labour Party would_ do the same if it was in the same position. He objected to being brought to a standstill by a minority of the House. CO-OPERATION NOT SOUGHT. "I was expecting to hear from the Eight Honourable tho Loader of the Opposition," said the Leader of the Labour Party (Mr. H. E. Holland), who said the Prime Minister had made very clear his reasons for Ms amazing'motion. The Prime Minister had said that tho Labour Party had not given him any assistance, but the Labour Party had not been invited to assist him. The Labour Party had not been approached, and it was doubtful whether tho Boform Party had been approached. What the Prime Minister had done was to take up an arbitrary attitude, lay down a policy on a controversial subject, and refuso to change his attitude. If the Prime Minister had adopted a statesmanlike attitude, he would have invited representatives of the three parties to meet him and see what could be done to meet tho position. Instead he had made a statement, and had launched an attack on the workers of this country, apparently at the dictation— Mr. Speaker: "Order! The honourable gentleman must confine himself to tho amendment." Mr. Holland said that the Prime Minister had referred to a telegram sent by him (Mr. Holland), urging a special session of Parliament, but had not stated the contents of tho telegram. Mr. Forbes: "I don't remember them." A Labour member: "He never saw it." Mr. Holland said that the tolegram had asked that a special session bo called to deal with tho unemployment problem, aud tho financial position in New Zealand, and had not referred to tho legislation which had been brought down this session. Tho Prime Minister would have shown nioro determination if he had made this sessioji tho one session of the year, and had then gone straight to the electors. NOT DISOKDEELY. Mr. Holland said the Standing Orders Committee had been entirely opposed to the application of a closure. Mr. Forbes had said he waa proud of tho fact that a closure had not been necessary up to the present, but lie now proposed to talco away tho causo of that pride. Mr. Holland refuted the suggestion that the Labour Party had been disorderly or unbusinesslike in dealing with the Finance Bill. Did Mr. Forbes not remember 1913, when he and his party kept tho House sitting for a whole week and moved all sorts of trivial amendments? Replying to an interjection from the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Holland said: "The right honourable gentleman should get up and speak for himself, and stop interjecting in support of his allies.'' Mr. Holland denied that tho public had lost interest in the debate on the Finance Bill. "Why," he said, "the galleries were crowded every night, and if tho Prime Minister had made a charge he might have helped to balance his Budget." (Laughter.) He asked if it was tho intention of the Prime Minister to prevent amendments being moved to the Finance Bill. Mr. Forbes: "The closure will be used with discretion." Mr. Holland: "Whoso discretion?" Mr H. T: Armstrong (Labour, Christchurch East): "The member for Mataura." (Laughter.) Mr. Holland said the amendment was so clumsily drawn that the Standing Orders might be used against tho Primo Minister himself. Mr. Semple: "We'll use it against him." Objection was taken by Mr. Holland to tho proposal that an affirmative vote of not less than twenty members was necessary to adopt the closure. "This Government will go down in history as the 'gangster Government,' " declared Mr. Holland. CLOSURE INEVITABLE. Tlie Leader of the Opposition (the Right Hon. J. G. Coates) said there were urgent matters to be deal with during the present session, and it was essential that the Government should have the fullest opportunity of presenting the business of the House. He regretted very much that it was necessary to alter the Standing Orders. He believed that tho present Standing Orders were quite unworkable, as it was impossible for any Government to got its business through under them. If they went on as they had been going they might be in session for months, and ho for one was not prepared to do that. Mr. Holland had overlooked the point that Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Committees could decide whether tho application of the closure was desirable at a certain stage. Labour members: "That is not provided for." "Wo have urgent business ahead of us," said Mr. Coates, "and wo will support the amendment, much as wo regret its necessity." TO PREVENT COMEDY-TRAGEDY. Tho Minister of Railways (tho Hon. W. A. "Veitch) said tho matter had been under consideration by Cabinet for some time, and was only decided on under pressuro of necessity and with very great regret. Steps had to be takon to prevent what was comedy on the surface, but what underneath was a Very wasteful tragedy. Whatever party had adopted the closure in Australia, tho fact was that the Labour Party had not repealed it, but had used it in the interests of dignified aud satisfactory procedure. He was certain that the people wero convinced that Parliament had reached an undignified position under tho new Standing Orders. A Parliament which failed to represent tho aggregate opinion of the people would not last long. Tho Labour Party had stated outside the House that it would use nil the Standing Orders to resist the Finance Bill. "WILL REGRET IT." Mr. A. Harris (lioform Waitcmata) .I'M !::•.: tin. Omiiinitt'-c which li:nl !.: .iscl tin yuiudiug Orders had uniini-j

! mously opposed a closure, and the i Primo Minister himself had strongly ■ opposed it from time to time. As sure as the sun roso those who were sponsoring the motion would regret it. If the Government could not get its legislation through, it should not remain in office. . It was only in offico on sufferance, and ■ ono did not -have to be a prophet to . predict' that it would not remain there i for very long. There was no justification for ;i permanent amendment to the i Standing Orders to deal with a tempor--1 ary situation. "I have always been doubtful of the wisdom of a closure," said Mr. Lysnar, ■ "but the immediate question we arc faced with at the present time makes it absolutely necessary." The responsi--1 bility for tho motion belonged to the Labour Party. He agreed that tho ulosnro was a good thing so long as it was used with discretion. Ono objection was that it precipitated a party vote, and might prevent a minority from expressing their views. It would be prudent to make a provision wlifereby Mr. Speaker must be satisfied that an opportunity had been given for every member to voice his views, or that there had been reasonablo discussion. Mr. J. T. Hogan (Independent, Bangitikei) regretted the extreme step that was being taken, and asked how much the Prime Minister proposed to drift away from the principles of Liberalism. Mr. Seddon had placed nothing in the way of- minorities putting up their objections. Mr. Forbes had chosen an inopportune time for the closure, for very soon he would have to defend his action before tho people. It was inopportune, too, because a minority of the House was putting up an effective, protest against the Government's wage-reduc-ing legislation. The Primo Minister was altering the rules in the middle of the game. POSITION WILL GET WORSE. The Minister of Lands (the Hon. B. A. Hansom) si ad that during an emergency session it was essential that the Government proposals should be allowed to go through. Tho country was in a very grave condition, and matters would' become much worse if they were allowed to drift. They had been sitting for seventeen days, and absolutely no progress had been made. A Labour member: "Question." It was not desirable to place tho responsibility of applying the closure on the shoulders of Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Committees, said Mr. Ransom. He went on to say that the" Prime Minister had repeatedly asked for the co-operation of the other parties in the House. Mr. J. S. Fletcher (Independent, Grey Lynn): "He said he would stand or fall by the proposals before the House even mot.'' Tho Minister said that Mr. Holland had made it plain that the Labour Party would not support the Government'a proposals. Indctd, he had indicated that every form of the House would be used in opposing the proposals. If those proposals were not placed 011 tho Statute Book a great many of the primary producers of the country would go to the wall. There were Bills on the Order Paper which wore m the best interests of the country. Mr, Armstrong: "Get on with them, ■Mr. Eansom: "This is the first time I have spoken, and I am not going to bo talked down by Labour _ members, who have been wasting the time of the House. I intend to raise my voice against the waste of time and the bulfoonery of tho Labour Party. Mr. Speaker asked the Minister U> withdraw, and Mr. Ransom said ho would substitute the words "burlesque of Parliament." Mr Parry: "Why don't you go to tho country'and do the decent thing» "BRUTAL BLUDGEON." Mr. M' Combs said that the only way to settle tho unemployment problem was to get rid of incompetents on the Treasury Benches. Mr. Fletcher: "Hear! hear! 7 Mr. M'Combs said that the Government' had announced tv policy before tho session, and had stated it was going to make a party matter of it. The Government was putting party before the welfare of the country. The safeguards in the closure rule of the House of Commons were not m tho present motion. There was no sportsmanship in what tho Government proposed. It waa not playing tho game. Mr. Forbes: "It is not a game. Mr. M'Combs said that the Labour Party was playing the same game as the Primo Minister did in 1913. The Government was flying in the face of tho mandate on which it had been elected. The Primo Minister had said that this was an emergency session, but tho proposed amendment to the Standing Orders was to be permanent. It was a brutal bludgeon. The various amendments to the closure motion in the House of Commons had gone in tho direction of giving back the powers which had been taken away. The present was a wrong atmosphere to consider the motion. The debate proceeded on similar lines this afternoon.