LONG SITTING.

Wairarapa Age, 25 July 1936, Page 5

LONG SITTING.

UNEMPLOYMENT DEBATE IN COMMONS. DEFENCE OF NEW BELIEF SCALES. THREE LABOUR MEMBERS SUSPENDED. RUGBY, July. 23. The House of Commons was still in session at 3 o’clock this afternoon after an all-night sitting during which the debate on the unemployment assistance regulations w>k continued. There were no answers to questions to-day, as under the rules of the House yesterday’s business goes on. If the debate closes at 11 o’clock to-night the House of Commons will have been continuously in session for over 32 hours.

Opening the second of the three days of debate Mr. Neil McLean (Labour) said that the unemployed were expected to become enthusiastic because 200,000 among them were likely to receive an increase of an average of 6d Weekly. Amid laughter he referred to the payments as a Woolworth increase from a Woolworth Government.

The Secretary for Scotland, Sir Godfrey Collins, said that the Government confidently looked to an unbiased public opinion sympathetically moved towards the needs of the unemployed to approve regulations intended to give even-handed justice to all applicants. Great Britain was treating her unemployed better than any other nation in the world.

STORMY ENDING. HOSTILE DEMONSTRATIONS. GOVERNMENT GETS LARGE MAJORITIES. (Received Friday, 7.45 p.m.) LONDON, July 24. Captain H. D. R. Margesson, for the Government, moved the closure, amid Labour shouts of “Gag!” and “Baby starvers!” followed by the singing of the “Red Flag.” Meantime forty or fifty unemployed in the Central Lobby, who had been interviewing members of the House of Commons, started a chorus: “Down with the means test!” Police appeared and shepherded them outside. The closure was carried by 371 votes to 163. Labour members* amendments to the proposals were defeated by 368 votes to 163 and 361 to 140. The new regulations were approved by 357 votes to 156. The House rose after midnight, after sitting for over 32 hours.

Mr. Dingle Foot (Liberal) criticised the regulations, although he regarded them as an improvement on the 1934 draft.

Sir John Simon, replying for the Government, said that the criticism of the Opposition had been concentrated on the household means test, but to two out of every three persons who would be affected the means test was quite irrelevant, since they had no resources. With regard to the scales themselves, the changes made in the new regulations numberd seven altogether. Every change was in the direction of improving the position of the applicant. The scales had attracted very little attention in the debate, and the reason, he suggested, was that the Opposition realised that reasonable and sensible people would not' be prepared to oppose them.

The usual good-natured chaff provided a number of humorous incidents to lighten the night's though tempers became frayed at times—Labour members in particular resenting the refusal of the Government spokesmen to accept their version of the hardship which they alleged the regulations would inflict.

Parliamentary correspondents describe the speeches as being of an unusually high standard for an all-night debate.

5 The Minister, Mr. Ernest ■ Brown, never deserted his post, and J the Dominions Secretary, Mr. Malcolm ■ MacDonald, supported him throughout. J As the afternoon wore on the effects ■ of the tiredness of members became b apparent, and during Sir John Simon’s J speech the Speaker was compelled to H suspend the session for a short time ■ to restore order. 1 A-t the resumption of business three members were suspended and withdrew from the House.—(British Official Wireless.) WILD SCENES. angry interjections. ALLEGATIONS OF LYING. ■ . LOND ON, July 23. Wild scenes in the House of Comi ni° j S -7 t 0 the ’“Pension of three ! 7 B i d v member8 > Mr. G. Buchanan ! ( {. nd ' Labour), the Bev. Campbell SteI phen (Ind. Labour), and Mr. J. McI Govern (Labour), during Sir John l bimon s speech defending the new unI employment assistance regulations. I Bucbanaa interjected that the I Minister -of Health had accused Glasl.gow of meanness in unemployed relief. 1 ok J °“ n Slmon replied that Mr I Buchanan was mistaken. I ® u< ’ ha " an: are not telling I the truth. You are lying. ” I The Deputy Speaker, Sir Dennis Herl bert, asked for the withdrawal of the I remark. I Feelings ran higher as Mr. Buchanan. I .jumping to his feet amid increasing upro”’ P er ai s ted in his accusations. h oilowing repeated warnings by the Deputy Speaker, Sir John SimoZrose to move Mr. Buchanan’s suspension. there were amazing scenes of confusion as Mr. Stephen, jumping up and gesticulating wildly, launched a torrent of inveetive which lasted for five n»rtL teS ‘« He ‘ C ?. Ued Gove rnment supporters ‘‘cowardly robbers and murderers of the working classes” and declared that the Minister of Labour was a contemptible little rat who Uf! h ” mJ” lU°, U a ded ° Ut ° f P ublic Me, and called Sir John Simon ‘‘a lying scoundrel.” The Deputy Speaker, after vainly ,I In £ *° rest °re order, suspended the sitting for a quarter of an hour. The House was crowded on the resumption, and motions for the suspension of Messrs Buchanan and Stephen were earned. r S lr , JobaS jnion rose to continue his benches 8 ™ 1 * 1 b ° 01ng from tbe Labour ”w r ’ n’ Cocks (Labour) said a bar k “° W that Sir J ° hn Sil,lOn is Mr. McGovern asked why Mr. Cocks was not guilty of the same offence as Mr. Buchanan. Tb e Speaker: ‘‘l have to deal with cases as I find them.” Mn McGovern: ‘‘Well, I say that the Home Secretary is a damned liar.” He refused to withdraw, and was also suspended. Sir John Simon then resumed his speech. These are the first suspensions in the fivTTays Parliament The P er iod is