Manawatu Evening Standard SATURDAY, JUNE 23, 1923. THE NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIV, Issue 740, 23 June 1923, Page 4

Manawatu Evening Standard SATURDAY, JUNE 23, 1923. THE NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE

The compliment paid to Mr J. C. Rolleston upon his maiden speech in the House of Reprosentaives in moving the Address-in-Reply was well deserved. The member for Waitomo made a very favourable impression upon members in general and his remarks were certainly well to the point, his advocacy of the rural producing interests and of the opening up of native lands being both timely and effective. Representing a back-blocks constituency and being, as a back-blocks settler himself, well acquainted with tho difficulties confronting back-blocks settlers, he was able to voice tho claims of the men and women who have elected to make their homes in tho wilderness and solitary places in plain language, which appears to have been all tho more eloquent because of its simple statement of fact. Mr C. E. Macnullan, who followed him, Avas also abie to voice, from practical knowledge of tho circumstances accompanying settlement in the back-blocks, the needs of the settler in tho remoter regions of his electorate (Tanranga), and both gentlemen made an excellent impression upon the House. Their speeches, though not so long as is customary on such occasions, covered all the necessary ground and giving lion, members something to think and talk about. From his reported utterances it does not appear that the Liberal Leader—who, in accordance with tho notice he had given, moved an amendment to the motion to present an Address-in-Roply to the Governor-General's speech, intimating that, for reasons stated, tho House had no confidence in His Excellency's advisers—was so successful. There appears to have been a lack of conviction about Mr Wilford's remarks which considerably discounted their effect, so much so that the Minister of Education, who followed him, said that ho was unable to discover in the speech of tho Lender of the Opposition any grave reasons for dissatisfaction with the Government. Mr MoLeod, who followed Mr Sidey, went further when ho declared that Mr Wilford had left those on the Government side of the House nothing to answer. The fact is that the very things upon which .Mr Wilford based his attack on the Government are included in its programme, the only difference being that Mr Wilford pins his faith on State banking and proportional representation, neither of which has been (as the New Zealand Times has pointed out) accepted by members of the Liberal Party generally as in keeping with Liberal principles. Apart from these features of tho Opposition policy, there is no real difference in the objectives of the Reform and Liberal Parties nor in the Government programme as outlined in tho Governor-General's speech and Mr Wilford's policy as set forth in bis no-confidence amendment to the Address-in-Reply. Mr Wilford's attack upon the Government was concerned more with matters of administration than policy and lacked the sanction of fact where it did not actually misrepresent departmental action. Jt made no allowance for the difficulties the Government itself had to encounter, and was easily answered by the Minister who followed him. What the Labour Leader thought of it may he gathered from Mr Holland's remark if (as stated by Mr Wilford) the Reform Party had passed its meridian, the Liberal Party was a setting sun, that might become a star, condemned to unutterable darkness-