A MAIDEN SPEECH.

Southland Times, Issue 21648, 9 March 1932, Page 4

A MAIDEN SPEECH.

In his maiden speech the member for Invercargill gave the House evidence of his disinclination to be a tame supporter of the Government. His criticism of the expenditure abroad in connection with the High Commissioner’s Office and with the League of Nations at Geneva must not be taken as an indication of his antipathy to the effective representation of the Dominion in London or to a failure to evaluate the work of the League, but his complaint that the costs in connection with the High Commissioner’s Office have gone up by leaps and bounds is accompanied with the observation that it is extremely difficult to obtain information concerning the manner in .which.

the expenditure is made. If economies are necessary in New Zealand, particularly with the social services, they can be made in the social side of the High Commissioner’s work in London, but we are not sure that an investigation of the outlay in connection with the trade activities, particularly with reference to the supervision of New Zealand produce, will not show that the present outlay is not enough. New Zealand’s contribution to the League of Nations does not represent a large proportion of the League’s income, but it is quite a large sum in the Dominion’s accounts and any relief obtained in that direction need not be taken as an indication of any diminution of the country’s support of the League. Mr Hargest’s complaint of'the slow progress of the House was directed bluntly at the Prime Minister, and it will be echoed throughout the Dominion, but it embraces the whole Government and also involves the House. The report of Mr Hargest’s speech suggests that it was commendably brief and to the point, so that when he spoke of wasted time he gave no opening to any critic to charge him with the commission of the sin he reproved. The Government has waited on certain reports, but it has been a long time coming into action, and it appears as if, in spite of the delays, it has moved more hurriedly than it should have in connection with certain matters. Mr Forbes has said that the caucus on the I.C. and A. Amendment Bill was a happy family, but we believe for all that it was not without criticism, and that the Government is realizing that its measure is receiving opposition from unexpected quarters because it goes too far and is too dangerous. It is a good sign that the Government supporters are ready to criticize where they think criticism is necessary, but we hope that the Invercargill member’s example of brevity will be copied. There has been a sad waste of time so far in a session in which no time should be wasted so that reasonable discussion may have ample room.