PARLIAMENT’S VOICE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 79, 25 January 1944, Page 4

PARLIAMENT’S VOICE

MR HOLLAND’S PROTEST j Wellington, Jan. 24 j “I want to voice the strongest possible protest against the apparent intention of the Government that the Australia-New Zealand agreement should he ratified without giving Parliament a prior opportunity of discussing its far-reaching provisions,” said the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Holland) in a statement to-day. “For a Cabinet of fourteen, two of whom do not represent any votes, to take to themselves the right to commit New Zealand lo a vital decision such as this is tantamount to telling the remaining sixty-eight members of Parliament that their views would make no difference in any case. This is in line with the Prime Minister's previous statement when a commit•nent was made without Parliamentary approval, when he answered a protest by asking, ‘What difference would it make, anyhow?’ This is the negation of Parliamentary government. The present Opposition is strong numerically and demands its basic right freely to express itself on such important matters before New Zealand is committed .to them. “It is five months since Parliament sat, and’the drift in important national issues goes on. The Press is gagged. Parliament is denied its fundamental right to determine these questions. Parliament should be in session now study ing these, and other questions. “The Prime Minister knew perfectly well the nature of the decisions likely to be arrived at long before he left New Zealand, and he should have called the House together and disposed of the formalities and had everything in readiness for a full and free discussion by Parliament immediately on his return. “Whatever people's political opinions may be. I feel sure that all right-think ing people will agree that New Zealand should not be committed for years ahead of decisions in which Parliament has had no voice. “NO IMMEDIATE URGENCY” “I know there* are occasions when urgent decisions have to be made and when the Government must act for Parliament, but in this instance there is no immediate urgency,” continued Mr Holland. “To-day members of Parliament, many of them newly elected, are cooling their heels. They are willing and anxious to serve their country in Parliament, but are denied their right to function. This is reducing Parliament to a farce. “F.or too long it has been the practice to assign to Parliament merely routine matters, while many major questions are decided by Order-in-Councfl or Government decree. “On behalf of 34 members of the Opposition, I protest against being denied the right to perform the tasks for w.nch we were elected. I can say now that the agreement will by no means receive unanimous Parliamentary approval, if such is sought “If the Government’s attitude is to be that the Opposition does not count, I can only say that before long they will have every justification changing that view. “I know no more about the Anzac Agreement than I have read ih the newspapers. As the leader of a very large section of Parliament, one would have thought that I would have been officially informed of developments as they took place, but that has not been done. STUDY OF AGREEMENT “At if.4' caucus last week the Opposition set tip strong working committees to study all important questions, and the text of the Anzac Agreement will be studied at a meeting to be held this week. But it would appear from the cabled reports that the agreement is to be ratified by the Government and that the opinion of Parliament will not be taken prior to ratification. That is a course which I cannot condone. The last major agreement made on behalf of the Dominion before Labour became the Government— the Ottawa Agreement —was submitted to Parliament for approval.”