THE LICENSING POLL

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17606, 23 October 1931, Page 8

THE LICENSING POLL

POSITION Off “DRY” AREAS POSTPONEMENT OPPOSED 1 (Per Press Association.) f WELLINGTON, last night. In introducing 'the IdcciisingfPoll Postponement Amendment Bill tin- the House 'of Representatives, Mr. ’ "W"" Ward (United, Invercargill) said lie was doing so at the request of a deputation which had waited upon him in-InVercargill, .claiming to represent a large section of ,tlie 'people. 1 ' Its 'object was to allow Invercargill to have a poll on the question'of local restoration atithesamo time ,as' the next general election. Under the •present legislation ho pull could bo held until the 1 general election following the mext one. file did mot*'kndW When the .next general election would take plain. jIV might' be postponed • one or'oven tWb years. f Mr. .1. A. Nash (Ref., Palmerston N.): niay be'for years', or jt may be-'for ever. ‘hy f-« Air. Ward said that if the general election were postponed loir two years’ ! it [wouldhe five years' before the next poll oh local restoration ’ could be taken, {That would he equivalent to eight years between the polls.' Suggestions vvevb heard now and again that the normal life of Parliament in .New Zealand sbOilld. be Increased to* five years/as was the base in the Old Country, and if that-WelW done it would mean there wodM'be' 10 lyeafs between' 1 the polls. ”f'P (b

NOT TAKING SIDES. Mr. Ward said that while 'the national, -poll on the licensing issue had 'been postponed* in'the-interests of natiohalyeponjbniy, ho ono’liad the right tb; deprive’the Invercargill people of - the option- 'off deciding whether their artel shohld he a'license or Jte'no-litehse atea.--The. feusijiiess‘people who "had requested'the;'introduction of'‘the hill were'prepared if necessary to; pay the' ! expenses'•inte)lyed i in taking the poll.*' 1 ' Mr;fWa&'cl poiritteh Mot that he was not taking I 'any" side'''brt : the 1 lideiisihg question. ‘"SW was'introduOing the bill as part of hiS'duty as 1 member for the district'. :i« «H.;y ' ien - . Mr. J. McOdiphs (Lab., Lyttelton} said that if Mr. Ward had bCeri consistent die < would hav%‘i opposed . tho original .iiiieasUl'e.' i ' Hd contended'that if thdi right ■to' hold the .poll Webb' granted;' liivercarIgill, it should he ■ granted- other' electoriatbs as well, * 'He'proposed, ; -when ! 'the drill reached! the dommittee stage"t6 imfprovo it 1 (Laughter.) ■ ;: The Et. Hon- G.' r W. ForbeS said the people of New Zeal&Pd' generally.-had accepted the'- postponement Of the .licensing pbllias' reasonablot ov; j i>;r- v ; 'Mr; McCqmbs> YduTfaven’t given them :».i chance to say.' •«•.-■' ; T""" ; he.:, ■ Mr. Forbes said he sympathised with Invercargill, but lie ■ thought tlie people : would be wisdAo 'contjnu'optb adopt- t]ie' ■attitude' they' had taken when tlihjpiani jbill was passed, namely/ to'lnakc ’a sacriSlice for the sake of thp'general principle’. I ' Mit ’F. Lnngstono*: ,, (Lab:> , '-Wdiniar«ip) (expressed the Opinion’ i-that proclaimed 1110-license apehs shoWld be- given * theji'iglit to hold a poll;';' He asked Mr.iWard whether ho would be prepared/to (amend thqbill to extend the privilege to other electorates and' to prdblaihiect' 'areas. 'Mr. Ward ; Yes.' ' * ;■’ -:>■*;»;.? Ate:-; Mr. Ward* replying to the debate, said he would; if the ' occasion > again ■ arose, 1 •vote as lie had done formerly When; it was a. question of! national"* economy. However, a local isstfepNvpst’a different ■mhttor. He lioppd: Mr. Forbes Would find it possible to/enaßlh liiyoraairgill and [other districts to" hold'-polls on local restoration. ' 'A; The hill was read a first time.