WHERE SHOULD IT BE ?

Grey River Argus, 25 January 1943, Page 6

WHERE SHOULD IT BE ?

Service by N.Z.E.F,

OPPOSITON LEADER QUESTIONS COURSE ADOPTED.

CHRISTCHURCH, Jan. 23.

Parliament was never given the opportunity to discuss where the New Zealand Divis’on should serve, said the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Holland) replying to statement by the Minister of Supply (Mr. Sullivan) that Parliament as a whole, and not the Government or the War Cabinet, unanimouslv reached the decision that followed. “I wish to emphatically contradict, the statement,” Mr. Holland said. "Mr. Sullivan in his statement is giving information about a secret session which is supposed to be secret, but that would not be so bad, if what he has said gave a proper picture of the position. Mr. Sullivan speaks of a decision being made by the unanimous vote of Parliament. In point of fact, no vote of Parliament has ever been taken as to where the Division should serve. The simple facts are that negotiations over the disposition of the Division were undertaken between Mr. Fraser and Mr. Churchill without consultation with Parliament, and without its knowledge or concurrence. The first 1 knew of the negotiations was when cablegrams were read to us in secret session, and the Prime Minister told us the War Cabinet’s decision which left Parliament no option but to agree. To say Parliament made the decision was entirely wrong.” Mr. Holland said he was not at liberty to disclose what happened in the secret session, but since Mr. Sullivan had told the oublic that the decision was unanimous, which it was not, he wished to make it quite clear that he himself was not aware of any negotiations until they had been completed. Moreover, he had objected strongly to such negotiations being opened without prior approval of Parliament. He was satisfied that had Parliament been consulted, before Mr. Churchill was approached, a course very different from that taken would have been j adopted.