“HITTING BELOW THE BELT.”

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16819, 23 August 1922, Page 6

“HITTING BELOW THE BELT.”

ACCUSATIONS AGAINST PREMIER. RESULT OF RECENT SPEECH. (Special to the “ Star.”) WELLINGTON, August 22. Party politics may now be expected to be heard of on the floor <of the House of Representatives. To-day there was an instalment when Mr Holland referred to the ‘'Dominion” report of the Prime Minister’s speech at Foxton. He said that he was not suggesting that the Prime Minister was responsible for the “ Dominion’s” report, or that he would be ro dishonourable as to state such a foolish lie, as the paper published, but the report credited the Prime Minister with saying that the policy of the Labour Party was simply one of confiscation. Mr Lvsnar: “That is correct.” Mr Holland said that the report said further—that Labour Party admitted it, whereas the Prime Minister knew well that it had been denied on the floor of the House. NO “ LIES.” The Prime Minister objected to the use of the word, “ Lie.” He was not going to allow Mr Holland, or anyone else to suggest that he had told a. foolish He. Mr Holland said he was not suggesting for one minute that the Prime Minister was dishonourable enough to tell such a, foolish lie. He realised the responsibility was that of the newspaper, but the report would ho published throughout New Zealand, and he wished to give the Prime Minister an opportunity of putting himself right. THE PREMIER’S REPLY. The Prime Minister said that his recollection of the Labour Party’s Policy was nationalisation of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, and if that, was not confiscation he did not know what was. Labour Members, “ Oh,” Mr Massey: “The honourable member and his friends may say ‘ Oh,’ but can they deny that their policy is nationalisation of the means of production. distribution and exchange?” Mr Holland: That is correct, hut that is not the point, this report says: “ The policy i.s one of confiscation, and that the Labour Party has admitted it.” The Prime Minister repeated that the Labour Party would nationalise the whole country if it had the opportunity. THE TRUE LOYALTY. I.rater in the day Mr Wilford also dealt with the speech, and emphatically repudiated the that there was no choice for the country, but Reform or Sovietism. He quoted from the report to the effect that Mr Wilford had openly stated in the House that he had negotiated with the Labour Party. The fight would be between Reform and Labour, between the Union Jack and the Red Flag of Socialism. “ That I consider,” eaid Mr Wilford “is hitting below the belt.” The Liberal Party upheld law and order, and detested direct action. Members qf the Liberal Party were loyal Britishers, and its candidates were loyal Britishers. They opposed Sovietism and believed in Liberalism. They believed that the best basis for loyalty was a deep love of country. “We say to the people of New Zealand that we are as loyal as the Prime Minister.” Mr Holland: te That is not saying much.” THE REFORMERS’ POLICY. Mr Wilford said that they knew that that was to be the Prime Minister’s policy. They knew that there would be no policy in the Budget. The Prime Minister and the whole of the Reform Party and the Reform Press were afraid, and instead of coming down with a policy to light the Liberal Party with, they were coming down with a cry that everybody who opposed the Prime Minister was disloyal. “ I am proud of my King and my country. Every man behind me is proud of King and Country, and we are as loyal as any man on that side; perhaps more loyal. I have never said in this House that I wae prepared to negotiate with Mr Holland. I said this-Mhat I was prepared t-o enter into negotiations with Labour to prevent vote-splitting, to get proportional representation. My policy is as distinct from that of the Labour Party as it is from the Prime Minister’s. 1 wish to say to the Prime Minister that there is no member on this side who will yield to him in loyalty. His loyalty is flag waving and lip utterance.” EXTRAVAGANCE DENIED.

In defending the Government on charges of extravagance to-night, the Hon G. J. Anderson recited a list of works and invited the Opposition to say they would discontinue such works or that they disapproved. Expenditure on public works and new railways was one of the items. Would the bon member for Stratford say work should be stopped on the Stratford railway? The member for Stratford (Mr R. Masters) said, without hesitation, “It has been stopped already.” “ And house building,” continued the Minister. “Would the hon member like us to stop that?” “ I should like you to make a ste.rt,” was Mr Master’s reply.