Motion Of Protest By Labour M.P.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18332, 8 December 1927, Page 5

Motion Of Protest By Labour M.P.

CHALLENGES PRIME MINISTER TO MAKE COAL STATEMENT. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. A.P,A. and Sydney “ Sun " Cable. (Received December 8, 12.25 pm ) LONDON, December 7. In the House of Commons, Mr Ramsay MacDonald moved to protest that during the Labour censure motion Mr Baldwin deliberately evaded any defence or explanation of Cabinet’s inaction in the Coal Trade crisis, on which the House declares and demands an authoritative statement by the Prime Minister. Mr MacDonald said that Hansard offered np> precedent for the Prime Minister not replying immediately to motions of censure. Labour’s inidetment was against the whole Government as well as against Mr Baldwin personally. The previous motion put the whole Government in the dock for the present disastrous position of the coal industry for which the Government was largely responsible, but Mr Baldwin insulted the Opposition by failure to reply. Mr Baldwin, replying, said it could not be held the Prime Minister was bound to answer every motion in the form of a censure motion, which had become a general method of seeking opportunity for debate. The Opposi•tion on November 16 showed dissatisfaction by preventing any other speaker being heard. There was no novelty in that method. He once took part in a similar demonstration, of which he was heartily ashamed next day. He had also learned that such scenes did not increase a party's popularity in the electorate. He thought the present motion showed Mr MacDonald’s realisation of the fact that disturbances achieved nothing. No party was willing to yield to clamour. Mr Baldwin went on: “In arranging the previous debate, I thought Sir P. Cunliffe-Lister should make the first general reply, as he was able to answer most points. I asked Sir A. SteelMaitland to answer particular points on unemployment. My own first intention aws to wind up the debate. Later I decided to give a place to Sir G. R. Lane Fox, who participated in the coal negotiations three years ago Sir G. R. Lane-Fox was shortly giving up tbe portfolio to undertake a difficult tas kin India. Therefore, I felt it would only be fair to give him a last opportunity of speaking from the front bench. For that reason alone, I decided not to speak myself. For this, the House is now asked to censure me. I await, the result with confidence.”