NUFFIELD’S MOVE

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 April 1946, Page 8

NUFFIELD’S MOVE

AGENT’S REPLY TO PREMIER

SYDNEY, April 17

Mr. G. A. Lloyd, who is managing director for the Nuffield (Australia) Proprietary Ltd., said to-day that he objected to the Premier of New South Wales, Mr. McKell, using the word “spurious” in reference to Lord Nuffield.

In what he called “his final word,” Mr. Lloyd said: “It is a pity that Mr. McKell did not direct his remarks, to clear simple issues of a matter which could not honestly be disguised. Personal abuse, even from the Premier, provides no need to alter Lord Nuffleld’s determination to refrain from immoderate wrangles. A number of published statements attributed to the Premier this morning are inaccurate, and such inaccuracy must: be in the

knowledge of the Premier. “Reflection on my competence leaves me undismayed, since I more highly value contrary opinions held in many other places: However, I do feel strong resentment at the use of the epithet ‘spurious’ in relation to a renowned- philantropist whose donations from ,his personal fortune for relief of suffering, and distress in the world exceed £25,000,000.”

DETAILS OF PREMIER’S CHALLENGE SYDNEY, April 17. Charges that Lord Nuffield’s published reason for not beginning the' Victoria Park car factory project was a spurious one were made by the Prime Minister of New South Wales (Mr W. J. McKell) in the New South Wales Legislative Assembly last night. He was replying to a censure motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr A. Treatt), who al-

' leged that Mr McKell had been com- ! pletely negligent. The motion was defeated by 42 votes to 16. Mr Treatt moved that the Government no longer had.the confidence of the House because of its failure to enable the establishment of a £1,000,000 British cai* industry at Victoria Park, and its undisguised preference for the setting up of a : State-sponsored turf club. Mr McKell, counter-charged that Mr Treatt and the newspapers were deliberately seeking to distort the facts. Lord Nuffield had not stated that he intended toßransfer the industry to South Australia, but had merely extended the contract already entered into with a South Australian firm. The Nuffield organisation had not carried . out any negotiations for the establishment of its own industry there. The Victoria Park project could not supply bodies for the chassis already on the way, as-Lord Nuffield himself had said/thaU

there would be no machinery available for eighteen months or more. The project at Victoria Park was a long-range one. “The point is that L6rd Nuffield has not given the reason for. not beginning the project,” said Mr •McKell. “The reason is not' stated because it is a spurious one and not ; the. real reason behind his action. Victoria Park is available. There is no likelihood of any resumption of racing in spite of its being subject to lease. He may go on -with it at any moment. There are no obstacles but every facility has been given him.

“I do not take back one word of what I said about Lord Nuffield’s representative. He did not handle the matter in the competent way that one would expect of a high business executive.” i Mr McKell alSo charged. Lord Nuffield with discourtesy in failing to answer a . personal message;. : ;