NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE.

Waikato Times, Volume 97, Issue 15271, 22 June 1923, Page 5

NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE.

MULTIPLICITY OF MOTIONS MEMBERS CONFUBED. SPEAKER ELUCIDATES POSITION. By Telegraph—Special to Times. WELLINGTON, Thursday. Labour’s surprise, which was expected, did not transpire last night, when the Leader of the party made his speech, hut it was revealed this evening just before the tea adjournment. Mr D. C. Sullivan (Avon) had been speaking for an hour, during which he reiterated all Labour’s arguments in favour of proportional representation, adding that although in the recent municipal elections in the four main centres Labour polled proportionately as higli in each, under proportional ror presentation at Christchurch they won six seats, while in the other centres they won no more than two at the most. Within a few minutes of the adjournment he moved an amendment to that of the Leader of the Opposition to add the words after “electoral reform,” the following words, “providing for proportional representation and the abolition of the Legislative Council.” The House became confused with the multiplicity of amendments before it, and the Prime Minister intervened asking the Speaker in what order the amendments would be taken.

The Speaker replied that the amendment of the Leader of the Opposition was before the House, and the amendment just moved by the member for Avon would be disposed of first. “There are three motions before the House,” added the Speaker. “They may all be discussed together as they all involve the main question. When the amendment of the member for Avon is disposed of we will take the amendment to the main question moved by Mr Wilford, and finally we will get to the main question. In regard to the other two amendments, Mr Ngata’s amendment will first be put, then Mr Nash's amendment, and then we get back to the main question.

Hon. W. Downle Stewart’s Speech. When Mr Wilford tabled his noconfidence motion in February, he was followed immediately by the Minister for Internal .Affairs (Hon. W. Downie Stewart), who Charged him with the responsibility of telling the House and the country how he could carry on the Government of the country if the vote went ids way. Although it fell to the lot of the Minister for Education to follow! Mr Wilford in the present debate, Mr Downie Stewart, who spoke last night, returned to the attack, and asked Mr Wilford the same question again. The Minister expressed the opinion that the Liberal Leader/ would not lake the responsibility of saying how he could carry on with the confidence of the country, but was only trying to upset the cart to see what would come of the scramble. During the afternoon Mr Veitch, one of the Opposition flying squadron who toured Tauranga, had impeached the Government with Tammanyism within the law. lie immediately became the subject of Mr Stewart’s humour. The Minister happened to be in Rotorua for the benefit of his health when Mr Veitch was telling the electors that the Massey economics were brought about by reducing soldiers’ pensions and other amazing things, although he had two years previously referred to Mr Massey as a strong man and an able administrator, but the name he gave to him at Tauranga was a “first-class scandalmonger and a fifth-class politician.” Sir Joseph Ward at that time might in .the judgment of Mr ■Veitch be the missing link between the Liberals and the Reform Party, but now Reform was beyond the pale with him, and must be destroyed. Mr Stewart paused to correct some extraordinary statements made by Mr Veitch about the reasons for the issue of the new capital ’dj|sjj|e Bank of New Zealand, and put some facts abroad among the Liberals and Labourites that were calculated to disturb their admiration of the functions of the Commonwealth Bank as compared with the Bank of New Zealand. Turning his attention to Mr H. E. Holland, he endeavoured to convince him that if the country sent Mr Massey to the Imperial Conference with only the powers of a delegate, pledged to a certain line of discussion and action, he might just as well.he left at home. Mr Stewart’s humour reached its peak when he referred to the admissions of Mr Sidey, Mr Wilford’s lieutenant, that the Government called him “The Tiger.” By a strange eoincidence, however, his sister discovered that the Sidey crest was a tiger sitting on its hind legs holding a Union Jack. The speech was voted the cleverest debating effort of two sessions. The Backblocks Settler. The appeal for the backblocks settler sounded by the mover of the Addrcss-in-Reply (Mr Rolleston) found an echo in the utterance of Mr Ilawken, a Taranaki member, who enunciated the principle that the best means of effecting closer settlement was to halve the size of farms of about 140 acres in his district, and to have a sinking fund clause in the application form for every advance to a settler. Other Speakers. Mr R. Masters (Stratford) selected a number of his favourite subjects for criticising the Government, the pt’ice of phosphate, the administration of the railways and soldier settlement. Beyond some more detailed references to the Imperial Conference, the debate has not introduced much new matter compared with the February discussions. With so many amendments it is likely enough that members will get tired of having to remember the numerical order of their precedence, and be glad to gel to a division soon after the week-end.