BRITISH COAL STRIKE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19969, 10 December 1926, Page 11

BRITISH COAL STRIKE

GOVERNMENT’S POLICY. LABOUR CENSURE MOTION. MR BALDWIN’S VIGOROUS REPLY. (Tress Association— By Telegraph—Copyright.) LONDON, December 8. (Received Dec. 9, at 7.15 p.m.) In the House of Commons Mr Ramsay Macdonald moved a motion of censure on the Government complaining of the disregard of the Royal Commission’s findings, the Ministry’s partiality to the owners, and the imposition of harsh terms by the owners, the only remedy for which, the motion declared, consisted in the nationalisation of the industry. The mover said that even one of the Conservative amendments to the motion failed to congratulate the Ministry on what it had done. He recalled that the Chelmsford eiecorate had recently changed a Conservative majority of 2000 into a minority of 1000. It was in that form that the Opposition would like to test the motion—at the ballot box. Mr Baldwin had alienated the confidence which m 1924 had brought the country to lus feet. The Ministry had failed to get anything advantageous out of the money spent on the Royal Commission Mr Evan Williams’s offensiveuess had defied the Cabinet and Mr Cook’s incompetence had baffled it. The Cabinet became a mere spectator, interfering only as the owners asked. The country had lost £500,000.000, while the owners were being given time to win. The miners had been taught that might ts nght. Extremism could be the on y fruit of the Cabinet’s policy. It was tne of he Government at once to go to the country to receive the doom it had earned. On rising to reply, Mr Baldwin was greeted with a hostile' Labour demonstra tion He said: “I shall be quite preyed to go to the country m good time Mr MacDonald’s first task - 1 day was over was to father a P window” motion for the irresponsiblesi at fgnSoas Mr Cook had the Trade Union Congress, ana miners Mr Cook, perhaps unintentionally, but through his hysterical condition fall, whereas what he had said conversation was tiiat iiteruaSS? ,■£ S.’i'r.rr. reduction in rf the Samuel report. The logo IT «nd fortitude of the men was”Baders hi pi w _, exoloited bv incompetent icaoersiup. The Prime Minister criticised the Labour Partv’s lack of courage in not pointing out the error while hnowing that rhe men were being fooled by a slogan. LTmTghT S'S.m T tow industrial Hours’ Bill for prolonging the dispute, fTL asked why Mr MacDonald had S £oSt siui -touco t„ r most Padded that he could not vote for such a proposal •mv Churchill, who was greeted with Labour Wsst said .that Mr MacDonald bad referred to Mr Cooks incompetence, Sf he (Mr ChurchiU) was doubtful StL'r ‘ihc-Pg— M H e a“ f sc p r i? r 10n thlt Mr MacDonald had allowed Mr Cook to get as far as Moscow before he uttered the word. If w Cook was incompetent why should th Government be censured? Mr Churcfiii ended by deprecating the association the trade union movement with ordinal., ‘“S.'S wa. rejected hg 339 votes' to 131. —A. and N.Z. Cable. THE NEXT COAL STRIKE. MR COOK IN MOSCOW. INTERNATIONAL FIGHTING FUND. LONDON, December 9. (Received Dec. 9, at 10 p.m.) The Daily Telegraph’s Riga correspondent reports that, after a four hours speech from Mr Cook, the Trade Union Commission of the Communist International in Moscow decided to start preparations for the next British coal strike and to establish an international fund for this purpose without delay.—A. and N.Z. Cable.’