UPROAR IN PARLIAMENT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 73, Issue 103, 3 May 1930, Page 9

UPROAR IN PARLIAMENT

FEDERAL LEGISLATORS

PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS EX-SOLDIERS PASSED OVER [By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright] Received Alay 2, 9.20 p.m. CANBERRA, May 2. There were impassioned speeches in the House of Representativs upon a motion for adjournment, moved by Colonel Cameron, to protest against the abolition of preference in employment to returned soldiers. Colonel Cameron said that at least 85,000 returned men would be affected. He insisted that the Government was bound to stand by the returned men. It was nothing short of a scandal to make them play second fiddle tc ordinary unionists who had played no part in the war The Prime Minister denied that the Government had abolished preference to soldiers. The policy of the Government was preference to unionists and no returned soldier could be denied preference if he joined the union. Unionism had made arbitration possible; arbitration was the policy of the country and preference to unionists was the policy of the Government. He understood that 80 per cent, of the returned men were unionists. Without unionism it would have been “God help the returned soldier!” The people who shouted most for them had exploited and robbed them.

Uproar followed, after which Air W. Al. Hughes, defending the returned soldiers, said that the Government had done wrong and a very foolish thing. The motion was talked out. MOTION IN THE SENATE. ANOTHER BITTER DEBATE. Received Alay 3, 1 a.m. CANBERRA, Alay 2. In the Senate a motion for adjournment w r as moved by Senator Sir William Glasgow 7, who warned the Government that the returned soldiers had a very powerful organisation which would deal with it in the same way as they dealt with the enemy if justice were not done to the returned men in the matter of preference. Senator Daly, leader of the Government, declared that the ministry had as much consideration for returned soldiers as the opposition. The debate, which was extremely bitter, like that in the House of Representatives, ended with the withdrawal of Sir William Glasgow’s motion.