DEFIANCE OF CHAIR ALLEGED

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 89, Issue 263, 7 November 1945, Page 5

DEFIANCE OF CHAIR ALLEGED

MEMBER ASKED TO WITHDRAW FROM CHAMBER OF HOUSE UNUSUAL INCIDENT ENDS IN WITHDRAWAL AND APOLOGY (P.A.) Parliament Bldgs., Nov. 6. About 9.30 p.m. the leisurely discussion of the Estimates in | the House of Representatives was interrupted by an unusual incident, resulting in the Chairman of Committees, Mr. McKeen, alleging defiance of the chair by Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (Opp.—Waitomo), with a result that Mr. Speaker was summoned and Mr. Broadfoot requested to withdraw from the Chamber. This he did, but the incident was settled by Mr. Broadfoot’s subsequent return and expression of regret.

The matter arose when Mr. Broadfoot Was speaking to an item of £73,000 for remuneration of Land Sales Courts under the Lands and Survey vote. Mr. Broadfoot asked what was the maximum amount advanced to a returned serviceman by the Rehabilitation Department. Mr. McKeen ruled that Mr. Broadfoot was out of order, as the matter should have been raised on the previous vote—rehabilitation. Mr. Broadfoot resumed his seat but rose again to say he would not be put down by the chairman. He was there as a member to bring up such matters.

Mr. McKeen said that if Mr. Broadfoot persisted in that attitude, he would have to ask him to withdraw from the Chamber. “CAN DO WHAT YOU LIKE!”

Mr. Broadfoot: You can do what you like about it. I can leave the Chamber! Mr. W. Sullivan (Opo., Bay of Plenty) rose to a point of order, but was requested to resume his seat. He then temporarily resumed discussion on the estimates, but the Minister of Supply, Mr. Sullivan, who was temporarily In charge of the House, said the position could not be left to remain where it was, as the’memoer for Waitomo had deflea the chairman. He suggested that the situation might be met by a complete withdrawal and expression of regret by the member for Waitomo to the chairman. Mr. Broadfoot: Making a mountain out of a molehill!

Mr. Sullivan: What? Mr. Broadfoot: Speak up! - Mr. Sullivan said that he ha<j never known such a situation to arise. Mr. McKeen: I am unhappy about it. I have been here for 24 years and I have never heard of, or seen, such an attitude as that taken up by the member for Waitomo. Mr. McKeen said that because the House was in committee some members thought they could take liberties. Thd Chairman of Committees was in authority when the House was in committee. A member had been defiant to the chair, and he could not understand the attitude of the Leader of the Opposition for not upholding the dignity of the House. If he (Mr. McKeen) were wrong in his ruling the member for Waitomo had every right to report progress and seek Mr. Speaker’s ruling. He (Mr. McKeen) was not infallible in his ruling. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Holland said that in suggesting, as ha had done, that the rules of debate be relaxed to enable Mr. Broadfoot to discuss a particular matter, ha had merely sought to pour oil on troubled waters. •tle 'WKS sure that, with a little more co-operation, Mr. Broadfoot would have expressed regret. There was no occasion for a row on the matter. If the Minister of Supply Insisted on taking the issue uo again, that was his responsibility. He was making a mountain out of a molehill.

Mr. McKeen repeated that he was dissatisfied with the position and he reported progress to enable Mr. Speaker (Hon. F. W. Schramm) to be summoned.

DEFIANT TO THE CHAIR Mr. McKeen, reporting the Incident to Mr. Schramm, after the latter had resumed the chair in open House, said Mr. Broadfoot had taken up a defiant attitude to the chair and irrespective of who was in the chair it was not right that a member should be allowed to defy it, otherwise ths Standing Orders of the House would mean very little and the power and strength of the chairman during committee pro-

ceedings would be undermined to the extent that it would be impossible to maintain order. Members could appeal against the chairman’s ruling, but the issue, at the moment, was whether they could defy the chairman’s ruling when it was given. Mr. Broadfoot sold f hat when he was discussing the case he had in mind he saw the Minister in charge of the vote, Mr. Skinner whisper to ;he Chairman of Committees. The Minister was well aware of the particular case and he 1 (Mr. Broadfoot) concluded the Minister did not want the facts made public, and was asking the chairman to rule him out of order. There was a lively discussion at this stage, with several members recounting to Mr. Schramm what had occurred in committee. Mr.' Schramm interrupted to say that the relationship between the member for Waitomo and the chair was what mattered. Mr. Holland said that Mr. Broadfoot had three times been asked to resume his seat, and actually did so. The discussion actually proceeded on the Estimates until the Minister of Suonly raised it again. The Minister of Rehabilitation, Mr. Skinner said he had not asked that Mr. Broadfoot be "gagged.” He was quite prepared to discuss the case in question on the floor of the House, or anywhere else. MR. SPEAKER RULES Mr. Schramm said the position was clear. There evidently had been a good deal of heat, but the chairman was in charge, and had a duty to maintain decorum of debate, and to rule as to relevancy. Mr. Speaker’s dutv was to uphold the committee chairman on these issues. He was confident Mr. Broadfoot's sense of responsibility and common sense would prevail, and lead him to express his regret to the Chairman of Committees. Mr. Broadfoot: I was requested to resume my seat, and did so. Mr. Schramm: I hope the honourable member’s good sense will lead him to express regret, otherwise 1 will have to ask him to leave the Chamber, and ask the Prime Minister to move a motion. lam sure the hon-

Durable member wm carried away ad the time. Mr. Broadfoot: I was not oanfed I was perfectly sold on the Mr. Schramm said he was very sorry about it, but he must ask Mr. Broadfoot to leave the Chamber. Mr. Broadfoot then withdrew. The Prime Minister, Mr. Fraser, said he would be most reluctant to move Mr. Broadfoot's suspension for the remainder of the sitting. He did not think the matter warranted the feeling that had been engendered. Mr. Holland said that if Mr. Snea/rer. had not denied him an opportunity earlier, he would have suggested a

simple solution which might junta prevented the incident being carried ‘ so far, and would not have had to humiliate himself by leaving the Chamber, as he now proposed to do, to ask the member for waitomo to return and express his regret. FEELING OF INJUSTICE Mr. Holland then went out to confer wi’h Mr. Broadfoot, and on Ids return said Mr. Broadfoot was suffering under a very grave feeling oC injustice and would rather pay any penalty than sacrifice what be considered to be his principles. | Mr. Schramm said the incident could be allowed to close if Mr. Broartfoot would return and make a statement which was acceptable to the Prime Minister. After further discussion Mr. Broadfoot returned to the Chamber, and said: “When the chairman imUoatad I should resume my seat, I said: ‘You can do what you like. I can leave the Chamber.’ I will withdraw those. .. words and express regret.” This was accepted by the House and the incident closed. Discussion on the estimates was resumed for the remaining few minutes until 10.30 ptai., when the House rose until 2.30 p.m. to-morrow.