NATIVE AFFAIRS

Northern Advocate, 8 November 1934, Page 6

NATIVE AFFAIRS

DEBATER REPORT ‘ CREDIT FOR EX-MINISTER. SJR APIRANA “WALKS THE PLANK.” CPer Press Association. — Copyright ,] .. WELLINGTON, This Day. The debate on v the Native Affairs Commission’s report on the motion of censure moved by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr M. J. Savage, was continued in the House of Representatives yesterday.

Mr A. E! Jull (Government —Waipawa) said he thought it was unfair to attempt to pillpry a man of the type of"the ex’-Native Minister as some Labour members had done. Mr Jull considered, the report was the worst compiled one he had seen. It had no continuity. The Maori Purposes Fund belonged to the Maoris, and was built up by a percentage on the sale of Maori lOhd many years ago. The House was prepared to overlook waste and extravagance which took place in an orthodox way, but if it was not done that way, there was trouble. -Every year the Statute Book contained legislation validating actions far more serious than those referred to in the commission’s report. Sir Apirana N|[ata should be given credit for bringing about co-operation in the Native race, and obliterating tribal difficulties. 'Mr F. Langstone (Labour—Waimarino) denied that any member on that side of the House was attacking the late Minister. What they did complain of was falsifying documents and the misappropriation of public money. The Native Minister had been generous to certain tribes, but others had received nothing, or very little. Mr W. E. Barnard (Labour—Napier) , quoted authorities in support of his contention that the whole Cabinet was responsible for the actions of any one Minister. The Government had no right to'make the ex-Minister walk the plank and then proceed as if nothing had happened.

>Mr S. G. Smith (Government—New 'Plymouth) said the ex-Minister could noj; be judged on the mistakes of his officers;: which were made in the.pecu,liar circumstances* of the last two or thtfee yealk , He must be judged oh his whole Work. At present they were top Wpse to the picture. In later years ; the- name of Sir Apirana Ngata, Dr. P. H, Buck, and Sir Maui Pomare would go down as those who had done excellent Work for the Native race.

Mr H. T. Armstrong (Labour— Christchurch East) said he believed in equality for both Maori and Pakeha, and the fact that the ex-Native Minister wa& a Maori , was no reason why not be brought against him. He complimented Sir Apirana oh': what lie had done for the Native race, , but wondered why. better land was; not selected for the development schemes/' :

Mr J. A. Lee (Labour—Grey Lynn) said he hoped the day would never come when, because a man made a mistake, he lost his manhood. Complaints- regarding Native affairs were raised by members of the House and by, newspapers before 1932, in which year the Auditor-General became interested;' He contended that negligence on the' part of the Government had; been proved. He quoted extracts frpm the report in support of the contention that, the Government had not acted when the complaints were made to it. i ‘

Mr W. A. Bodkin (Government— Central Otago), paid a tribute to Sir Apirana, 1 who would in* later years be eulogised for the work he had done for his people. The debate was a'Sjourhed.