LABOUR TRIUMPH

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26541, 16 August 1947, Page 8

LABOUR TRIUMPH

INDIAN SETTLEMENT GOVERNMENT MEMBER’S CLAIM HEATED INTERLUDE IN HOUSE Parliamentary Reporter WELLINGTON, Aug| 15. A heated interlude occurred during the discussion in the House of. Representatives to-day on the inauguration of the new dominions in India. ‘ It arose out of remarks made by Mr G. H. O. Wilson (Govt., Palmerston North) about liquidation of the British Empire and credit for the settlement of the Indian problem. Mr Wilson said it was significant that India was given her independence under a Labour Government in England. Had a Conservative Government been in power, the settlement of India’s problems would not have been reached so soon. , Among the protests from the Opposition, Mr Holland said that it would have been better left unsaid. Mr Wilson said that Britain had many things to be ashamed of in India but at the same time she also had much to be proud of. No doubt there would be some people who would regret that India had achieved her independence because they would not now have the opportunities for exploitation that, they had in the past. It would be interesting to know if the common language of English would continue to be used now that India was independent. If it was, it would be helpful in future international reHe was happy to say that the British Empire was in liquidation. Opposition voices: What? New Basis for Relations Mr Wilson said that the Empire was being replaced by the Commonwealth of Nations which was much more desirable. We had to realise 1 that New Zealand’s future relations with India would have to be on an entirely different basis and he suggested that an exchange of representatives should be made. Mr E. P. Aderman (Oppn., New Plymouth) said that he detected in Mr Wilson's speech the voice of the Oxford Union in 1933. Mr W. A. Bodkin (Oppn., Central Otago): Anti-British. Mr Aderman said the speech of the member of Palmerston North would be received with the greatest delight in Moscow. He had given credit for India’s independence to the Socialist Government in Britain, but had ignored the background of events leading up to India’s achievement. When Mr Aderman had finished speaking, the Prime Minister intervened to' say that, while he was reLuctant to curb any expression of opinion, some discussion which had taken place was not helpful to the object in view—an expression of cordial good wishes to the two new Dominions.

Opposition members: Hear, hear. Mr Fraser said that for members on either side of the House to argue about facts of history was not helpful. Mr F. W. Doidge (Oppn., Tauranga): Will the Prime Minister repudiate the view of the member for Palmerston North? Controversy Deprecated Mr Fraser said that the history of India had a thousand facets. He deprecated the introduction of a controversy into the debate. Mr Bodkin: So long as the independence of India is not claimed as a Labour triumph. Mr Fraser said it was desirable that the House should be united in sending its message to India and Pakistan. The Leader of the Opposition. Mr Holland, said the Opposition welcomed the Frime Minister’s remarks. What he h..d said needed saying at that juncture, but it was not' easy for some members to listen calmly to one of their number expressing his joy at the liquidation of the British Empire. Mr T. H. McCombs (Govt., Lyttelton): That is not a fair interpretation of what he said. Mr Holland added that it was not helpful to hear a claim that what had been achieved in India was the achievement of any one political party. The Prime Minister should stop that sort of thing.