“SECRET DIPLOMACY”

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17061, 20 September 1929, Page 7

“SECRET DIPLOMACY”

THE OPTIONAL CLAUSE - LABOR PARTY PROTEST ' \ ‘ __ NEW ZEALAND’S POSITION (Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON,. this day. The attitude of New Zealand towards the optional clause of the Statute for the Court of International Justice was discussed in the House of Representatives yesterday, the subject being raised by Mr. 11. E. Holland, leader of the Labor- Party, who formally moved the adjournment to give an opportunity of debate. Australia and New Zealand, Mr. Holland pointed out, were the only two portions of the British Empire which .had not yet signified adherence. He considered it was due to Parliament'to know; what was the attitude adopted by the 'Government, and might conceivably run the risk of having its undertaking repudiated by the House when submitted for confirmation. Acceptance of the clause would not, he argued, dispose of the Dominion’s rights to appeal to the Privy Council on inter-imperial matters, for sueh disputes were not likely to involve the Dominions in warfare with each other. The Prime Minister, Sir Joseph Ward, was unable to carry the subject further, for he opened his reply by declaring that Mr. Holland did not appear to realise that all communications which had come from the Home Government, and which had gone from the New Zealand Government on this subject were marked “secret.” All questions which had been put to him by the opening speaker could be comfortably, answered but for this bar to publicity at the present moment. Mr. Holland: The people should know everything that is being done. It should not prevent you from explaining your Government’s attitude End the instructions sent forward. “Is that a proper position to put me in?” asked Sir Joseph, who reiterated that all documents were secret. He had been receiving communications almost every day since early in March, and the file included telegrams of thousands of words, involving messages to and from the Prime Minister of England and the Prime Ministers of the self-govern-ing Dominions. He was hopeful that next week he would be relieved from the obligation of secrecy. NEW ZEALAND SIGNS “I have taken up a certain attitude which I consider justifiable on the optional clause,” added Sir Joseph, “and while the hon. gentleman lias put his views on record I am not yet relieved of the responsibility of regarding this matter as secret. The High Commissioner, who has been representing New Zealand at the League of Nations Assembly, was authorised to sign the optional clause, subject to certain reservations which hre the result of consultations with all representatives of His Majesty’s Government. I understand that the signatures of the representatives of all parts of the Empire will be made today. Our main consideration has been to secure united action by all His Majesty's* Governments. ’’ The 'comment of the Leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, Was that the proper thing has been done to enable the Empire to maintain a united front. He did not further discuss the matter, though Labor memtbers carried on the debate at somo length,, as they were of the opinion rthat the whole subject should have been dealt with by Parliament, and that there should be no secret diplomacy.

THE. PROPER, COURSE. (Per Press Association.) ill*. P. Fraser (Labor) said the leader of tlie Labor Party had not asked for a single document or communication. All lie had asked was that the Government’s attitude on the signing of the optional clause bo made known to the House and the country. Other governments had done that. The House and the country had a right to know what tlie attitude of the responsible representatives of New Zealand might be on such a question. What reservations concerning the optional clause did the Government consider necessary? It seemed that the Prime Minister had not grasped the fact that all the people had outgrown secret diplomacy. The British Prime Minister and all the leading countries had broadcast their attitude to the world, but little New Zealand took up the stand that the matter could not he mentioned outside Cabinet room. A frank statement should be made. Tlie Rt. Hon, J. G. Coates said Mr. Fraser seemed to have overlooked one or two administrative necessities that should not be forgotten. The British Prime Minister was only one among several Prime Ministers of the Empire. No doubt frank opinions were being expressed between the different portions of the Empire on this point. It was important that negotiations between parts of the Empire be regarded as conn den-' tial. If New' Zealand' to-day set down her opinion that she was agreeable to ! everything, she might he acting in advance even of the British Prime Minister, who might have certain reservations. Mr. Fraser: Why did Canada declare her attitude? Mr. Ooates : Even Canada, had certain differences. I see no harm in the attitude taken up by the Prime Minister. T think it is the proper course. The position is met ouito well if the Prime Minister places the cables and communications before Parliament a, a, later stage, and tlie Whole matter can then be discussed. T believe the Prime Minister desires peace as much as anyone in this House. The whole Empire should show a united front.

CRITICAL LABORITES. Mr. M. J. Savage (Labor) said he thought the position very remarkable, because how could there ho a united front when Australia and New Zealand had failed to make their respective opinions known. It seemed that a hopelessly minority Government was seeking to dictate an international policy. In times past the Prime Minister had gone to England and made agreements for which he could obtain ratification because of his majority in the House, but the position was different today. The fact, was' that t he- nfajdrity ,of the House could,' if it" chpse, reversd the Government’s decision and the Government would then have to repudiate its agreement. Mr. W. E. Barnard (Labor) said all the Labor members were asking was for information on the subject before the country was bound to any course of action. There was the same need for a' united front in tlie House as there was among the nations of the Empire. Mr. J. S. Fletcher (United) contended that the Government was the executive of Parliament, and if was the Government’s duty to conduct the negotiations. He could not understand the attitude of Labor members. Mr. F. Waite (Reform) said it was all very well for the Labor members to complain of the actions of a Government which happened to he in a minority, hut the Labor members should remember that they themselves had put the Government on "the Treasury benches. If seemed that every now and again they regretted having done that. , Mr. E. J. Howard (Linor) said that it was wrong to say that Labor had nut the United Party on the Treasury' benches. Labor had put .Reform off the Treasury benches, which was a different thing. : Mr. Holland, in reply, said that all ho had asked Sir Joseph Ward was that ho should give an indication of the policy of the Now Zealand Government in regard to signing the optional clause. He had not asked for disclosure of any secret communications, and' be could not sco why Sir Joseph Ward could not have complied with his request.