LABOUR WHIP SAYS PLEDGE WAS KEPT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18578, 28 September 1928, Page 16

LABOUR WHIP SAYS PLEDGE WAS KEPT.

DISPUTE OVER VOTE ON LICENSING BILL. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, September 27. Mr D. G. Sullivan, M.P., Whip of the Labour Party in Parliament, disputes the correctness of the statement made by Mr J. S. Dickson, senior Government Whip, dealing with the matter of pairs on the Licensing Bill. Mr Sullivan prefaced his further remarks by stating that the Labour Party, as a party, had no standpoint on the Licensing Bill, except on those matters such as bare majority, which were planks in the party’s platform. He said that Mr Dickson’s statement that Mr Jordan, member for Manalcau, had “intimated that he did not desire a pair on the Licensing Bill,” could not possibly be correct. . “As a matter of fact,” said Mr Sulli-. van, “I know definitely that before he left to represent New Zealand in Canada, Mr Jordan interviewed almost every member of Parliament opposed to his viewpoint and asked them to pair with him on the Bill. He actuallysupplied me as Whip with a list of those whom he had approached, and that list is in my possession. In every case he was refused, but subsequently intimated to me in writing that he had arranged to pair with Mr T. W. Rhodes, who was also going to Canada, on Clause 4 of the Bill, dealing with the question cf majority, Mr Jordan against the clause and in favour of the bare majority. Mr Rhodes for ihe clause and against the bare majority. The bare majority is a plank in the platform of the Labour Party. Mr Jofdan’s written statement is a.s follows: “I have paired with Mr T. W. Rhodes (Thames). I vote: Bible in schools, No; bare majority, Yes; daylight saving, Yes; Government measures.—Jordan.” , Mr Sullivan continued: “On the day following the defeat of the Licensing Bill I saw Mr Dickson and said, ‘Well, what about Jordan and Rhodes? Shall we fix up their pair? Mr Dickson said ‘No,’ and asserted that Mr Jordan did not wish to be paired. He produced a statement signed by Mr Jordan covering the Bible in Schools, Daylight Saving and Government measures. I produced my statement from Mr Jordan, authorising me to pair him with Mr T. W. Rhodes. It is true that the statement held by' Mr Dickson made no reference to the Licensing Bill, but that means nothing, as Mr Jordan had already done the proper thing in instructing his own party whip how to pair him on the Licensing Bill. As the Government Whip, Mr Dicksor had no authority whatever with Mr Jordan, and it is nonsense to say that because no reference to the Licensing Bill is made in Mr Jordan’s statement to Mr Dickson, the former did not wish to be paired. Mr Jordan had already instructed me in the matter.

“ All this is confirmed, so far as it indicated Mr Jordan’s wishes in the matter,” said Mr Sullivan, “ by his a-nswer to a deputation of his own constituents, which waited upon him at Onehunga on Monday', July 23. The deputation consisted of Mr T. 11. Macky'. Mr C. D. M’Lean and the Rev D. I>. Scott. In a signed statement on behalf of that deputation, Mr T. H.

Mackv reports Mr Jordan s reply as follows: 'With reference to the arraneement for an effective pair. Mr Jordan stated that he had left the matter completely and unconditionally m the hands of Mr D. G. Sullivan, Whip of the Labour Party, and was prepared to abide by any arrangement which he could make. If the New Zealand Alliance in consultation with Mr Sullfvan could assist in the arrangement oi such a pair, he had no objection to raise. He insisted that he had dune his utmost to secure a live pair, but had been baffled at every turn by the uiv willingness to pair of members who had voted on the opposite side of the Licensing Bill last session. “ These facts constitute a sufficient reply to Mr Dickson’s statement as it affects Mr Jordan, but in order to put the matter beyond all doubt, 1 sent the following cable to Messrs Jordan and Rhodes in Canada: “’Jordan, MP-, and Rhodes, M.P., Empire Parliamentary Delegation. Montreal, Sudbury. Canada.—Please cable at once joint signatuies authority to pair you, Jordan for bare majority, Rhodes "against bare majority. Licensing Bill.—Sullivan.’ “The reply from Canada now in the hands of the Speaker of the House of Representatives is as follows: — “ ‘ Sullivan, Parliament., Wellington,

N.Z.—Pair respectively for and against bare majority.—Jordan. Rhodes.’ ’’ Mr Sullivan concludes by saying that the evidence was complete that Messrs Jordan and Rhodes had arranged a pair on Clause 4 of the Licensing Bill. Mr Jordan for the bare majority, and Mr Rhodes against the bare majority, and that Mr Jordan had been faithful to his pledges.