LABOUR PARTY AND DEFENCE.

Waikato Times, Volume 104, Issue 17554, 8 November 1928, Page 9

LABOUR PARTY AND DEFENCE.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—Mr Petrie, Labour Party candidate for Hauraki, rather gave his party away when, in speaking on defence, he said, "Mr Hall had stated that the cost of defence in New Zealand was 14s 8d per head, and it was not too much. In his opinion Gd a head was too much." This from the member of a party which in its election manifests says, "reorganisation of the defence system." Their official platform does not even say that. Its only positive pronouncement on defence is "repeal of .the Military Service Act and the Defence Act." It suggests nothing in their place. What a mean proposal is that of Mr Petrie. Let the Old Country pay, but even Gd a head would be too much for New Zealand. This, of course, is loyalty, but is of such a peculiar brand that people may be excused if they do not recognise as such. Then the candidate put up a 'straw figure in order to show his bravery in knocking it down. He said, "If the Labour Party is disloyal because it said the compulsory system must go it is in good company, as both Canada and Africa have thrown it out." What sham! Nobody has ever said the party was disloyal for the reason he puts forward. The reasons why his party's loyalty is questioned are quite other than the "one he presents. A party which never has a good word to say of the British Empire, which in anv dispute between Britain and other Powers generally finds Britain in the wrong; which sings "The Red Flag" at its conferences, never the National Anthem. We say a party that docs these and many similar acts has itself to blame if its loyalty is questioned. Were Mr Petrie in America and flaunted the red flag as his party has done in New Zealand he would probably be taught a Iseson in loyalty by a hard knock on the head We Britishers are a tolerant people perhaps too much so at times We are, etc., N.Z. WELFARE LEAGUE.