NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LI, Issue 15649, 1 July 1914, Page 10

NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION.

MOVED BY SIS J. WARD, ADDRESS-IN-HEPLY DEBATE. DEFENCE AND FINANCE. THE HON. J. ALLEN REPLIES. [BT TELEGRAPH.— ASSOCIATION'.] Wellington-, Tuesday. " I propose to move an amendment of no confidence in the Government, because its policy and administration are not in the ■interests of the masses of the community," said Sir Joseph Ward, Leader of the Opposition, in opening his speech in Addess-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives to-night. Ho taxed Mr. Lee (Oamaru), who moved the Address-in-Reply, with knowing nothing about the effect of the Public Service Act, which had not resulted in a saving, bat in an increase of expenditure from £741,000 to £744,000. It was equally idle for the member for Matterton to say his party would approve of an increase of the graduated land tax when he knew that tho Minister for Finance, whom he followed, had publicly declared that there was to be no further increase of the graduated land tax. The Naval Question. The Government was not entitled to the confidence of the peoplo because of its method of dealing* with the naval question. It had withdrawn the subsidy from the British Navy, and committed itself to a local navy. It had been weak, vacillating, and uncertain on this question all through. Ho quoted on interview given by the Hon. Jas. Allen, and contended that the Minister had clearly declared V. favour of a local navy. Tho appointment of a naval adviser was only a step towards that end, otherwise what was the adviser to advise upon ? The people, said the speaker, had a right to know the nature of the interview between tho Minister and the Australian Government. It was not his personal matter, but one that affected the whole of the people, He denied that the Admiralty was in favour of a local fleet, and quoted a speech of the First Lord of t!io Admiralty in support of his view. Tho idea of New Zealand looking after the interest of the Pacific with one Bristol cruiser was absurd.

The Premi»r: Don't talk nonsense! Sir Joseph Ward: Then if you do not mean that wa ought .to bo told what you do mean. The First Lord of the Admiralty 'had declared that three Dreadnoughts would be useless as a defence of the Pacific. What, then, would be the position of a single Bristol cruiser? At present they had only the Philomel Under their control. Was the naval adviser being brought out to advise upon this vessel, which could not live five minutes within five miles of a modern battleship? He asked if the naval policy was to be decided at the Naval Conference next year. What was the naval adviser eoing 'to do in the meantime ?ha asked. Before long the Government would be spending one and a-half millions on defence alone. Reforming the Council. Referring to the Legislative Council, Sir Joseph severely criticised the postponement of the reform of the Council, in the face of the Government's declaration that it must be reformed. It was going to furthdr "stuff" the Council with its nominees, and so prevent tho Liberal Party imposing a further application of the graduated tax if it was returned next election. He deprecated the manner in which the settlers, local bodies, and workers were : being treated. He mentioned advances made to show that the Liberal Party had treated these branches of th# community more generously in spite of the fact that the Government had an abundance of money in the particular De ; partments. At Blenheim the Hon. James Allen had stated that he could have proved the figures used in the prospectus issued in connection with the Government loan were erroneous, but had he done so he would have been cutting hi 3 own throat That statement had to be explained. Either the figures were correct, and if so, they were a tribute to the Liberal. Governments, or the figures were erroneous. If so,, had the member been honest with the London investors? The Government, when in opposition, had denounced everything done by the Liberal Government when it laid down the foundations of that policy which undoubtedly contributed to the prosperity they had heard so much of that night. Charge of Bribing Electors. Ministers had been touring the country during the last few months promising all t sorts of concessions to the people. _ When in opposition they called this bribing the people with their own money. In concluding, Sir Joseph Ward accused the Government of want of courage because it h?d not brought in the Bills on the large questions as non-party measures. Private members were bringing in legislation which the Government ought to have faced. It had failed to cany out the greater part of its pledges, and was (therefore not worthy of the confidence of tho people. Reply by Hon. James Allen. The Hon. James Allen congratulated Sir Joseph Ward on the vigour of his speech if not on the material it contained. The Government was prepared to accept the no-coniidewj motion. Tie grounds for the motion we:3 apparently that it had not brought about sound finance, adopted a naval policy which he did not approve of, that it had not administered the State advances properly, and had not reformed the Legislative Coijncil properly. No Government, he said, could be expected fo deal with all the planks of its platfont in two years. The hon. gentleman had bee a in office for 20 years, and what had his party done about insurance against sickness and unemployment? When tho Government came into office it found that the Legislative Council was almost entirely composed of nominees of the Liberal Government. The new appointments were to get legislation through. It was finite easy to get up figures to show which party was returned by a majority. They vere 'in power by a majority of the House. He denied that aggregation was troing on due to legislation passed by this Government. -Mr. Wilford's figures did' not deal with areas but values. Sir Joseph Ward owed an explanation to the country for the unsound position of the finances when he left office. Finances Now Sound. The finances of the country were sounder now than ever before in the history of the country. Before ho took office the finances were " rotten. ,v Tho Advances to Settlers Department was so administered that when he took office no Milliliter could make them out. Why did not the Leader of the Opposition raise a lean and strengthen his departments. If he had been desirous of serving his country instead of his party he would have come to bis probable successor and said that the raising of a loan was 'absolutely necessary. The Minister further contended that there was no money to meet commitments and liabilities when he took office. During election year Siir Joseph Ward had so poured out money to bribe the electors that he found it necessary to reduce the I loans to settlers in October, 1911, and these were further cut down by Mr. Myers. After the plunge had com© the aftermath. Mr. Myers had had to take his share and he (the speaker) had to take his, but he was proud to say the position of the Department was never sounder than it was to-day. Money was being advanced in large amounts.and there was no reason ■why all reasonable amounts should not bo ; advanced thy year.

The Advances to Settlers Department had now £1,634,000 to its credit. . The Loans to Local Bodies Department was also in a 60iind position and money was being .idvanced to the full limit of the law. Never a Party Question. When in opposition he never made the niw question a party one. The Government had committed the country to nothing more than the training of the personnel, and it was necessary to have an adviser. Sir Joseph Ward had tried to make the country believe that the Government was not iii favour of one Imperial navy, The present ' Government was more in favour of one Imperial navy than the Leader of the Opposition. Now the Defence Minister would be able to take an interest iii the training of the navy personnel and place his estimates before 'Parliament. After the men were trained, the full Imperial navy would be open to them. He quoted from the London Times to show that the local navy was approved by the Admiralty. The' Opposition had ridiculed the proposed acquisition of one Bristol cruiser, but the Government had not committed the country to one pern of expenditure on ships." "Little New Zealanders." Those opposed to the Government were little New Zealanders. The best way to serve the Empire was to establish local independence and show their patriotism. The Admiralty had broken the agreement entered int) at the Imperial Conference, which was attended by Sir Joseph Ward. Had Sir Joseph taken Parliament or the people into hi* confidence with regard to the declaration of London? Sir Joseph Ward's proposal for a naval defence meant £500,000 a year. What the preset Government proposed would cost only £100.0~? per annum. The Leader of the Opposition had accused the Government of not cutting down expenditure and stopping borrowingWhat the Government promised to do was to control expenditure, and it could not be expected that they could cease borrowing in such a younjr country as (his. The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr. T. Wilford, and tho House tosc at 11.45 p.m.