THE IRISH PARTY AND THE VETO

New Zealand Tablet, 14 April 1910, Page 572

THE IRISH PARTY AND THE VETO

In the course of his speech in the House of Commons in the debate on the Address-in-Reply, Mr. John Redmond said it was well that at the earliest moment in a new Parliament the fact should he emphasised that the Irish Nationalist members, although they had been freely included in the calculation of. the Government’s majority by the British press, in reality stood,. as they had always stood, , apart and independent, allied to no British party, and prepared to accept what they considered good measures for Ireland from any British party returned. Their only reason in coming to the House at all was to advance the cause which the Prime Minister had rightly called the cause of full self-government for Ireland in all purely Irish affairs. The Nationalist Party supported the Government heart and soul at the last election because the Home Rule pledge given by the Prime Minister was supplemented by a pledge which they regarded from their point of view as more important namely, the pledge which was given with reference to the Veto of the House of Lords. They regarded the abolition or limitation of the Veto of the House of Lords as tantamount to - The Granting of Home Rule to Ireland. The Prime Minister definitely pledged himself not to hold or. assume office until he had passed a Bill dealing with the question of the Veto. Speaking at the Albert Hall, he said the Government ‘ would not assume office until they could secure the safeguards which experience showed them to he necessary for the legislative utility and honor of the Party of Progress.’ That pledge was repeated in substance by every other Minister on different platforms, and Mr. Asquith now explained that by safeguards he meant the passage of an Act of Parliament. The words used by the right hon. gentleman in the speech to which he referred are clear, and no attempt had been made to contradict the interpretation which had been freely placed upon his words during the recent election. Down to that moment it was the universal belief amongst all par-

ties in this country, and in Ireland, that the Government had given a pledge that they would ask for guarantees as to the use of the Royal prerogative, and that if they did not get these guarantees they would decline to hold office. It was on the value of that pledge, taken in conjunction with the Home Rule pledge that the Nationalist Party supported the Government at the last election. As to the value of that support there was not one man on the Ministerial side of the House who would have any question or doubt. The policy outlined by the Prime Minister was to reintroduce and pass into law the Budget before they were satisfied or had received any reasonable assurance whatever that a Bill dealing with the Veto could be passed into law this year or during the present Parliament. In his (Mr. Redmond’s) judgment, that was A Disastrous Policy., It was throwing away and wasting the mandate of the country. The issue at the last election was the unconstitutional action of the Lords in rejecting the Budget. Now it was proposed to send the Budget back to the Lords and to ask them not as a right under a new scheme whereby they would be forced to pass it, but to pass it as a favor. In that way the Government would postpone any chance of forcing the Veto policy to success. In his judgment, if the Government passed the Budget and postponed their Veto Bill they would justify, in the minds of many people, the action of the House of Lords, because the Peers claimed merely to have referred the Budget to the electorate. Let the Prime Minister give them a reasonable assurance that he would be able to carry his Veto Bill into law this year, and the Nationalists would vote for the Budget. They were willing to pay that price, but they were not willing to pay that price for nothing or for an absolute uncertainty, which they believed would end in disaster and defeat. They were sincerely anxious to support the Government in their efforts to deal with the veto of the House of Lords. They were not seeking a quarrel or desiring any break, but they could not in this matter work blindfold. They could not be a party to a policy of ploughing the sands once more or to deliberately throwing away the great mandate which the Government had received from the electors by acquiescing in the passing of the Budget and the ending of the financial crisis without first obtaining guarantees as to the passage of the Veto Bill. Let the Prime Minister be prepared to go boldly to his .countrymen on that issue of the House of Lords, and not want to be kicked out by the action of the Peers.