PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20603, 30 June 1930, Page 11

PARLIAMENT.

PBOTB,ACTED DEBATE. IMPREST SUPPLY BILL. PROSPECTS FOR SESSION. THE ATTITUDE OP LABOUR. ONLY ONE EXPLANATION. [BY TELEGRAPH. —SPECIAL REPORTER.] WELLINGTON. Sunday. Thera is not much variety about tho first few days of any session of Parliament. and the events which have occurred in tho House of Representatives sinco tho opening on Thursday liavo borno a remarkable resemblance to tho happenings at tho beginning of every session for tho last four or fivo years. For this tho Labour Party is mainly responsible. Ever since 1926 it has nsed the occasion of tho first Imprest Supply Bill to flog the question of unemployment, and that was tho lino again pursued on Friday evening. Tho result was that tho House did not rise until after 3 a.m. yesterday, tho Imprest Supply Bill having then been passed. However, Labour's tactics have shown one point of difference. In 1926, in 1927 and in 1928, the party moved a no-confi-dence amendment in tho Government on the ground that it had not dealt adequately with the unemployment problem, but no such amendment was advanced at tho same stags last session or this, although the figures plainly show that tlu> problem has not been solved by the United Government. Tho Reform Government became a target for Labour's deadliest shafts on this question, but against the United Government tho Labour Party uses only hard words which break no bones. Labour's Inconsistency. It is an amazing record of inconsistency on Labour's part, and is capable of only one explanation. Labour is determined at all costs to keep tho United Party on tho Treasury benches. The debate showed then that the new session will be much the same as tho last as far as party allegiances aro concerned. There will be one real Opposition, the Reform Party. Labour will be critical of the Government on occasion, but, according to all tho indications, the criticism will not be pressed to the logical limit of dividing the House, unless Labour is positively certain that tf'e question is one on which Reform and United broadly agree, such, for instance, as the policy in Western Samoa. An examplo of the limiting effects of this "government, right or wrong" attitude was given when the House was asked to elect a chairman of committees. The official Government nomination was Mr. W. A- Bodkin, whom the party had chosen by ballot from among several aspirants. A Reform member proposed Mr. J. A. Macpherson. It is not necessary to consider the respective merits of the two nominees, except to say that both had genuine claims to commend them;- in other words, it was a question to be decided according to personal predilections.

Prime Minister's Decision. Mr. Macpherson had won his way into the House by defeating Mr. E. P. Lee, then a Minister of the Crown, at the 1922 elections. The tables were turned on Mr. Macpherson in 1925, but he again won the Oamaru seat in 1928. He had had the advantage /of Parliamentary experience prior to the present Parliament, and might be expected to have a proper grasp of procedure, an asset of some importance when the number of novitiates in the United Party is considered. Mr. Bodkin has been 18 months in the House. He is a lawyer, and has had experience at the Ear in important cases. It may fairly be said that he is a strongef 'party man than Mr. Macpherson, judged on the tenor of his speeches. In, moving the Address-in-Reply a year ago, for instance, he spoke in much stronger vein than is customary on that occasion. Assessing the qualifications of each man, members might fairly have been divided in their fancy, not on party, but on personal grounds. Yet the Prime Minister had no sooner intimated that he regarded any nomination apart from Mr. Bodkin as hostile to the Government than Labour, with amusing reference to the constitutional procedure, announced in effect that, "Mr. Bodkin then is the man for us." Attitude of Mr. Holland. While it is pleasant to note Labour's affection for the methods which are supposedly constitutional, it has to be remembered that in 1923 when the senior Reform Whip proposed Sir Charles Statham for the Speakership, Mr. Holland nominated Mr. J. McCombs. On that occasion Mr. Holland said: "Clearly the Government is not entitled to elect a Speaker, because it is in a minority." Mr. Holland is fond of quoting Hansard against others. Is it unfair to suggest that he should practice what he preaches ? The Address-in-Reply debate will commence in the House at the beginning of the coming week. The Government, anxious to introduce the Budget, hopes that this debate, usually a wearisome business, will not he protracted On the Address-in-Reply all manner of subjects may be discussed, and many local grievances have/a--habit of protruding themselves at that stage. However, on this occasion, the big question will undoubtedly be the recent developments at Arapuni. Should tlm subject become the sport of rival politicians, not much good can be server! by the debate. There are lobby whisperings that an effort will be made to, attack the Reform administration, but the precise reasons for the projected assault have not been disclosed. Request by Mr. Coates. Evidently the whisperings have come to tiio ear of the Leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. J. C>. Coates, for he took (lie first opportunity of asking the Prime Minister whether he would make? available to the House a complete statement of the investigations, reports and other matters relating to the initiation, construction and development of the Arapuni works and consider setting up a Royal Commission with a personnel which would lift the whole question out of the realm of political controversy. With reasonable .luck the way . should bo clear for the presentation of the Budget tho wepk after next. However, that depends entirely upon the volume of speaking to bo done in the Address-in-Reply debate. ' * 1 J Meanwhilo there is no certaintv as to whether the Prime Minister will be able to secure the despatch of sufficient business to enable him to leave at the end of August for the Imperial Conference. The packing of a Prime Minister's bnggago for such a mission is an operation involving several weeks' work and Mr. Forbes has not yet given the word to "go ahead." However, the travel preparations ,do not yet rcquiro to be accorded urgency.