DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16553, 12 October 1921, Page 10

DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE.

SIR JOHN SALMOND’S APPOINTMENT. A CRITICAL OPPOSITION [From Ora Coiuixspondent.] WELLINGTON. October 11. [ The that ££r John J Salmond will represent New Zealand 1 at the Washington Disarmament Conference was greeted with many critical interruptions from the Opposition side of the House. There also was a minor difference of opinion on the question whether the leader of the Opposition had a right to comment on Mr Massey’s Ministerial with the result that Mr W ilford failed to get the customary privilege. i Mr Massey, in making the announce- ! nient, stated that the Disarmament i Conference will meet at Washington 1 next month,, and lie believed the arI rangement made for New Zealand’s rei presentation would be quite satisfactory to the people of the Dominion. It was quite impossible for him to go, and he had turned to Sir Francis Bell, who was specially qualified to undertake these duties, but Sir Francis distinctly stated that lie wcfuld not think of leaving his colleagues during the present session. .He had been in charge of the preparation of legislation and it would have been a serious loss t<? Parliament had Sir Francis Bell gono. Cabinet came to the conclusion that for other reasons it was not desirable to send a member of the Government, therefore they looked around to find one who was well qualified to represent New Zealand and express New Zealand’s views before the Conference. Cabinet was unanimous in selecting Sir John Salmond, who had accepted the position. He was especially qualified as one of the best authorities on constitutional law, and was wqll known in other parts of the world as a distinguished lawyer. Hon J. A. Hunan : Is this not a disarmament issue? Mr Alassey: It is spoken of as disarmament for want of a better word. \ou Will *£© v. bat is done later on. Mr Witty : S‘urely it would be better for a Minister to represent us there. Mr Massey replied that he hardly need remind members that they were entering upon a very important session, and Ministers’ hands were full and likely to be so until Christmas, perhaps tor some time afterwards. Representation would be better than taking a Minister away from his duties. Mr Sullivan : The appointment is no compliment to Parliament. Mr Veitch: Utterly wrong in-prin-ciple. Mr Massey : There could be no more capable representative than Sir John Salmond. Members : He won’t be a. representative. Pho Hon J. A. Hanan asked if the Prime Minister would follow the Commonwealth precedent in submitting a name Tor approval of the Honse. Mr Massey replied that it would make no difference, because the huge majority would vote for Sir John Salmon d on account of his special qualifications. Replying to further questions he said that New Zealand’s representative had no power to commit the Dominion ; only the Prime Minister was expected to be able to speak for the country. Sir John Salmond’s place on the Bench would be filled by ex-Judge Chapman, thus no inconvenience .would be caused. M-T M ilford rose to call the attention of Mr Speaker to the usual custom that the leader of the Opposition wag, by courtesy of the House, permitted to comment on a Ministerial statement. Air M’Combs : Will we have the same privilege? There is another leader in the House. Menders : Several. Mr Speaker explained the custom, pointing out that it applied to only one lender, and there was no discussion permitted. Mr M Combs : May T move an amendment? Mr Speaker.- You ccn make an objection. Mr Holland suggested that reception of the proposal would largely depend on the same privilege being extended to the Labour benches. Mr Speaker: It has been the custom for one leader of the Opposition to reply. at any rate I ask members jo express their opinion. Mr M’Combs promptly answered “ No. 1 ’ consequently Mr Wilford was deprived of his opportunity of comment. Subsequently, by way of question without notice, Mr Wilford scored his point, asking whether New Zealand’s representative only acted in a consultative capacity to the British delegation. Mr Massey concurred, but a tided that the representative’s view was fully put by British speakers.