IS IT OBSTRUCTION?

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 151, 1 August 1914, Page 12

IS IT OBSTRUCTION?

OPPOSITION TACTICS. GOVERNMENT REPORTS TALKED OUT. Sir Joseph Ward, said his attention had been directed to a statement made by the Prime Minister in the House last evening, during his temporary absence from the Chamber, with regard to the "talking out" of the Lands Department report during the afternoon. The right hon. gentleman had said there was not the slightest use of laying any papers on the table "until these matters were disposed of." Was the Opposition to be denied the right of discussion? The Prime Minister must recognise that one side could not expect the other to remain silent when debateable matter was raised, and to imply that the Opposition were adopting any unusual course was unfair. Mr Massey said he was pleased that the Leader of the Opposition found it necessary to explain away what had taken place the previous day. He did not object to debate and criticism, but he did to waste of time, and the tactics that had been indulged in lately. The lands return had been "talked out." Sir Joseph Ward: No, the debate was on a supplementary return. Mr Massey: The day "previous the same thing had happened with regard to a paper laid on the table by the Minister of Finance. Sir Joseph Ward: He read a statement and made a comment about it. Mr Allen: I made no comment whatever. Mr Massey: I made no comment with regard to the paper I quoted yesterday, and we have a perfect right if we feel inclined to do so. Exactly the same thing took place on the report of the Commission on the kauri gum reserves. Dr Te Bangihiroa: Your own supporters talked that"out. Sir Joseph Ward: One of your own members discussed the matter immediately by pre-arrangement. Mr Massey: Why pre-arrangement? Sir Joseph Ward: I should think it was. Mr Massey: There was no such thing. Further back the same thing happened with the report of the State Fire Insurance Department. There is no justification for prolonging debates until the half-past five adjournment. What is the object? Mr L. M. Isitt (Christchurch North): To expose the tactics of Eeformers. Mr Massey: I wish the hon. member would not interrupt so frequently. Mr T. M. Wilford (Hutt): Don't you think the time might be extended when important niatters are. under discussion. Mr Massey: I say the object of the tactics was to prevent the Minister replying to the arguments and statements made. (Ministerial cheers.) Now this cannot be allowed to continue. Ministers have a perfect right to reply, and if we do not get a reply at halfpast five we must have another opportunity. In regard to the last report the Speaker ruled it could not be printed until the discussion had come to an end. If an amendment of the StandingOrders is necessary I am prepared to ask the House to agree to it. • In view of what has taken place I am placing some of these papers in front of the Orders of the Day, aiid that is the course I shall, have to adopt in future. Sir Joseph Ward: May I say with The indulgence of the House, that I have never objected

Mr G. J. Anderson: I object, Mr Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition was thus denied the opportunity of speaking further, and the House proceeded to the lsext business.

To the last drop. There is never a trace of '' grounds,'' never a vestige of waste, with '.'Camp" 'Coffee. .6 Wherever men are found in good fellowship —where the braw Scotch tale is told, and the guid smoke rises to the rafters —man, there too will ye find BON NUO DOON TOBACCO. Test it youn-elf. 2