“UNFAIR QUESTIONS”

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9722, 26 July 1917, Page 5

“UNFAIR QUESTIONS”

DEFENCE MINISTER REPLIES SUGGESTION BY SIR JOSEPH WARD. Mr John Payne (Grey Lynn) gave notice yesterday to ask the Minister for Defence why the sons of Mr A. H. Miles, Wellington, and Mr John Roberts, of Dunedin, had not been sent to the front. Had they boon exempted?

Sir James Allen said that he would reply to the question at once. Ho thought that hou. members should be a little bit cautious about bringing up tiiioh questions, as they created tile impression that certain men were siiii'King their duty, and it was not fair to them. He had the report as to Mr John Roberts’s sons. He had oiuy two sons. He was very sorry to have to make this statement, but he was hound to do it to protect them from that suggestion. One of them was Lieutenant-Colonel Roberts, and tho other was Mr James Roberts, of Dunedin. Both of them had married several years ago and had children. Colonel Roberts had boon rejected as medically unfit, but had been working at Headquarters ever since August 4th, 1014, without pay. (Hear, hear.) He was doing very valuable work indeed. So valuable, that, evon if lie was fit, ho should wont to retain him in New Zealand. He took the opportunity of publicly thanking him for that work. (Hear, hear.) ihe other son, Mr James Roberts, had volunteered and was turned down as medically unfit. One son of Mr Miles had been turned down as medically unfit, while the other had been to the front, and had returned to this country wounded. (Hear, hear.) FINANCE MINISTER SPEAKS. Sir Joseph Ward asked the Speaker whether, during the )var, when questions in regard to which names had to be given, the circumstances should not bo compelled to bo submitted to the Minister in Charge first and reply given by him. Everybody in the country was going to he liable to have his or her sons’ names brought up in that way. Nobody was going to he safe in' this war from baying questions asked in tho House, perhaps at tho suggestion of some persons who wanted to have their name candied about in that way. He thought that they- ought to do all that was possible to secure, unity in the countrv throughout the war, and to preserve unity they ought to prevent hard feelings being created in the homes of those who might, for one reason or another, not have been able to let one of their sons go to the front. (Hear, hear.) Mr Speaker: .“I regret that under tho present standing orders or ruling of tho Speaker. I have at present no voice in the matter. If, however, questions are out of order, they are prevented from going on the Order Paper.” But, ho added, if it was the general feeling of the House that Sir Joseph AVard’s suggestion should he followed, he would act ujion it. i The Prime Minister: “I can speak on behalf of the House; and I can say that the House will support you every time in maintaining the dignity of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Whether there is a standing order or not, wc are all desirous of an improvement being made on what has taken place lately. (Hear, hear.)” Mr Massey added that he had also been thinking of mentioning the question of notes appended to members’ questions. In most cases they were quite unnecessary, and simply expressed the views of members. A PRIVILEGE ABUSED.

The Speaker stated that the notes were always revised, and many of them were very much condensed before they were put on tho Order Paper. Ho asked members to be as brief as possible both in their questions and their notes in future. , The asking of questions without notice was a > privilege that was also being very much abused. He had endeavoured to prevent it, and had asked Alinisters to assist him in doing so, hut hitherto without avail. It was intended that only questions of an urgent nature should bo jiut without notice, and the privilege should not bo abused hv asking questions that could very well go on the Order Paper in tho ordinary way.