MR VEITCH AND OFFICIAL LABOUR.

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 15977, 20 November 1919, Page 7

MR VEITCH AND OFFICIAL LABOUR.

WHY HE REFUSES TO SIGN UP. EIGHT ON OFFICIAL LABOUR’S WAYS-. Doubtless, there are qtrfte a number conscientiously supporting what is known as the “official” Labour Party, who do so hy reason ..of being attracted by the Party’s platform, and who do hot question the political sincerity of its leader and personnel. Whether the best of policies is sufficient to warrant confidence if sound leadership and consistent adherence to principle be wanting is, however, a question which the supporters of the Party might well ask themselves after the light shed upon “official” Labour’s action in Parliament by Mr W. A. Veitch, at his meeting at Aramoho on Tuesday evening. # " Mr Veitch received a most attentive hearing from a good meeting, which was presided over by Mr F. B. ; Clarke. He received a vote of thanks and confidence at the conclusion of a speech which followed general lines, except where he justified his action in refusing to sign up with the New Zealand Labour Party, • ONLY ONE THING AGAINST HIMv 1 In dealing with this matter, Mr Veitch wished it clearly understood that he had nothing personal against the official Labour candidate for the Wanganui seat, nor did he take exception to the latter’s standing for the seat if he desired. He had only met Mr Mcllvride once, and had, of course, read the reports of his speeches, and from these circumstances formed the opinion that he was a man of more than ordinary intelligence and a good fellow. His object was merely to define his own position, not to be personal about anyone. He had been asked: “Why do you not join the N.Z. Labour Party?” He had been told that official Labour had nothing against him beyond the fact that he refused to join up with it. Therefore, if he could justify his own attitude, there was no justification for the opposition against him.

CAUCUS CONTROL OF MEMBERS’ VOTES.

Mr Veitch pointed out that if he signed up with the Party, he not only bound himself to follow the platform, but also to record his vote in obedience to the decision of the Party caucus. There was, in his opinion, nothing so undemocratic as any group of men assuming the right to control the principles and the conscience of any representative of the people. His responsibility, he asserted, was to the people who represented him, and he refused to be controlled by anyone but his own constituents- Control by a group was the essence of intrigue and the very antithesis of democracy . He had served in Parliament for eight years, and he absolutely denied even having turned down the interests of the Workers.,

OFFICIAL LABOUR AND THE SOLDIERS’ GRATUITY.

Mr Yeitch then gave two concrete examples to explain why he refused to join the Party led by Mr Holland. The first was in reference to the gratuity to the soldiers, and his authority was Hansard, in which would be found a full and official record of the matter. A strong point had been made by the official. Labour Party that they moved an amendment last session, the effect of which would have been to increase the gratuity from Is 6d to 4s. He would show the absurdity of the action. The Government proposed Is 6d. An amendment was moved to increase the amount to 2s. He voted for this. But the House rejected it. The.official Labour, party then saw a chance for an advancement, and moved another amendment that the amount be 4s per day. How, asked Mr Yeitch, could they possibly expect to carry 4s when the Honse had just rejected 2s P Everybody knew such a proposal would he rejected. They knew it themselves, and their action was nothing more than an electioneering job. OFFICIAL LABOUR YOTES AGAINST GRATUITY. Mr Yeitch then proceeded to put the "acid test” on official Labour’s attitude towards the soldiers’ gratuity. Where, he asked, was the sympathy of Mr Holland for the soldiers in the true test in 1913. The Government in that year brought down a Bill—the Expeditionary Forces Bill—which provided these thjoigs —disfranchisement of military defaulters for ten years, abolition of conscription after the war,, and a bonus to the soldiers. What happened at the third reading of that Bill? Mr Holland and Mr Fraser voted against it. But, emphasised Mr Yeitch, if Parliament had not passed that Bill, which sanctioned a bonus to the soldiers, then the gratuity could never have been paid. If anyone wanted proof, let him look up the division list in Hansard.

THEIR TRUE SYMPATHIES. -!» 'The position, therefore, was that Messrs Holland and Eraser actually voted against a bonus to soldiers rather than allow the disfranchise of defaulters. Now it would be seen where their true sympathies wore. He mentioned this to show one reason why he, would not sign up. Had he been a signed member at that time, he would.have found himself pledged to vote against the bonus to soldiers. “I thank God I was not/’ declared Mr Veitch, amid loud applause. RAILWAYMBN’S SECOND DIVISION WAGES, # “I will now give another example,” continued Mr Veitch. Most railwayman knew-that during the session just closed the Government brought down a.Bill to increase the salaries of the First Division of the railway service, and also to merge the war bonus of th© Second Division into their wages. The effect on the Second Division was to give some only a small increase, and most no increase at all. When the Bill was before the Railways Committee, he and Mr Smith, of New Plymouth, did their utmost to persuade Mr Massey, as Minister of Railto give another 2s per day to. Hi© Second Division, but ho refused. The Bill then came back to Parliament for its second reading, after which th© House went into committee to consider it clause by clause. When the House came to the wages schedule. Sir Joseph, Ward moved an amendment that the salary of one of the high officials be reduced by <£l as an indication that‘the House required that more money should be given jx> the Second Division. His reason for doing this was that the Standing Orders of the House prohibit any member from

moving to spend money. Only the Government can move in that direction, and, i|ierefore, the only way for a private member is to move a redaction as an indication of what is desired. Therefore, Sir Joseph Ward moved in this form, explaining that he was not attacking the Government, but only giving an indication of the desires of the House.

OFFICIAL LABOUR VOTES WITH MR MASSEY.

Mr Maseey was anxious. He saw indications that some of his own party would vote for the amendment, and that the Government would, have to amend the BilL As it was he only carried it by 31 to 23. “But what do you think Messrs Holland, Semple, and Walker, the only official Labour members in the House at the time, did?” asked Mr Veitch, continuing. “Would yoi believe it? Those three official Labour members went across, and voted with Mr Massey to defeat the proposal to secure better wages for the Second* Division.” It was for official Labour to justify the action of its represents tivea on this occasion. The Hansard recording this matter was not issued yet, but would bo to hand in the course of a day or two, and would furnish proof ho anyone who wanted it, WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN. The foregoingj'acts would be interesting, continued Mr Veitch, to those who believed the welfare of the workers was wrapped up in Mr Holland and his coterie, and to those who said that Veitch had failed. If official Labour had voted for Sir Joseph Ward’s amendment the vote would have been within two of the Government’s, and with such a close tl-ipg it might have been possible to force the position in the Second Division’s favour. Had he (Mr Veitch) been signed up, he would again have to vote with them. Well, he was anxious to bo re-ekoted, but if he had to eeli his political soul to Mr Holland, ho would rather not return to Parliament at all.

WHO IS CAUSING THE SPLIT?

Referring' then to Ms own position, j Mr Veitch said lie won the Wanganui seat eight years age in the name of Labour and had held it on that platform since. Therefore, the once who were really creating a Labour split were those who now cam© and attacked Man on on© point only—that he refused to sign up under Mr Holland- They appeared to deem that of sufficient importance to, split up the Labour vote, and give the Massey party a chance to win the seat. Be had stuck to Ms principles, and never changed them. He had been told that he would be punished for supporting the Government’s war policy- Well, he would accept that position, and those opposing him could say what they liked, said Mr Veitch amid applause. His conscience told him he did the right thing in supporting the Military Service Act, and he obeyed it. , A Voice; “Why not a referendum?” Mr Veitch: 'T am prepared to take my share of responsibility for doing it without a referendum, and if that is not acceptable to the people, I will take my gruel.” (Loud applause.) WILL PACE THE MUSIC. Continuing, he said that the official Labour Party professed much sympathy for the conscientious objector. But ho never heard them say one word of sympathy for the man whose conscience told him it was hie duty to go to the front. All their sympathy was for the conscience of the man who didn’t want to go. He might give some people offence by saying that. If so, he would face the music, and if the men were willing to risk their lives, he would be at least willing to risk Ms job by saying it. Amid further loud applause, Air Veitch concluded; “They can go on with the game. I will take my gruel, and will rely on the good sense of the patriotic and loyal citizens of Wanganui to send me back to Parliament.”