DISAGREEMENT IN LABOUR PARTY

Southland Times, Issue 23945, 11 October 1939, Page 6

DISAGREEMENT IN LABOUR PARTY

DIVISION ON ATTITUDE TO WAR

Criticism of the attitude of the New Zealand Labour Party to the war was freely expressed and opposed at Thursday night’s meeting of the North Canterbury Labour Representation Committee, says The Press, Christchurch. Opposition to the official attitude of the party was expressed in a statement by Mr G. W. Samms, the president, who then placed his resignation before the meeting. A motion that his resignation not be accepted was proposed and was ultimately carried unanimously. However, a number refrained from voting, it is reported. “Nir Samms is held in .profound re—spect by the whole movement, irrespective of their views,” said one delegate, explaining the reason for the decisive vote in support of the president. One of the l leaders in defending the actions of the party since the war broke out was Mr R. M. Macfarlane, M.P. No statement could be drawn from the Mayor by The Press, and Mr Samms also declined to make any comment on the meeting or to give any details of his statement.

ATTACKS ON POLICY DEPRECATED INSTRUCTIONS SENT BY LABOUR PARTY > ' / (Special to The Times) AUCKLAND, October 10 A circular letter from the headquarters of the New Zealand Labour Party has been sent to its various affiliations, indicating that in future no motion or business, except motions brought forward by the Labour Representation Committee executive, will be placed on the agenda or considered by the committee unless through official correspondence from the affiliated organizations. The circular explains that at the last meeting of the national executive of the party consideration was given to the fact that certain committee delegates were in the habit of moving without notice resolutions attacking the Government or disagreeing with the party’s policy, Without having been authorized to do so by the organizations which th%y represented. It was deemed necessary to instruct all committees to enforce the executive’s ruling strictly. Nothing, the circular adds, in the instruction was intended to prevent any delegate from moving an amendment to a motion that was properly before the Labour Representation Committee. The national executive would be glad to have affiliations’ co-operation and assistance in giving effect to the instruction by ensuring that any business they desired discussed by the committee was forwarded by their organizations to the committee’s secretary in time to be placed on the agenda paper. “The national executive,” the circular states, “would also appreciate assistance in ensuring that delegates to the Labour Representation Committee are persons who wholeheartedly support the Labour Party’s policy, platform and principles as agreed upon at the annual conference.”