Mr. Fraser's Conscription Appeal Falls On Deaf Ears

Chronicle (Levin), 25 May 1949, Page 6

Mr. Fraser's Conscription Appeal Falls On Deaf Ears

Press Association) f

(Per

WELLINGTON, May. 24. Before conscription can be brought into operation in New Zealand, the Labour Government must take a referendum. This, after a stonpy day at the Labour Party conference, was the end achieved by those who, mainly as indiyiduals, fought the might of the platform, defied the Prime Minister and his colleagues, ignored their appeals and their warnings, and finally brought the Prime Minister to the point where he was prepared to amend his own motion and propose a referendum. , - It was a day of doom for Labour. Many delegates appeared t0 feel so. They fought a proposition which was moved in the. morning by Mr. Fraser although Mr. Fraser had warned that. unless the conference empowered the Government to bring in national service, there would be no Labour Governemnt. And before the day ended they were gratified to see the Prime Minister, obviously because it was politically expedient, amend his resolUtion so that the vital third clause, instead of requestmg the Government in the name of the conference to introduce compulsory national service, read: — \ "The conference requests the Government to use aii the resonrces of country essential for defence and the preservation of our people, our country and our Commonwealth, and that if the resources are not availahle without compulsory national service, the Government be re({uested to obtain the views of the electors on this question by a referendum." Before this decision was reached, Mr. F. L. Langstone, who has long been established as a man who fears none in the Parliamentary Labour Party, declared from the floor of the conference that he had been the lone dissentient from a caucus decision on the issue of compulsory national service and that if the proposition was carried by the conference then he was flnished • With the Labour Party. . . * ^ - There was little doubt that this declaration from an-.old Party veteran, had a big eft'ect for Mr. Langstone is held m generally high esteem as an honest and forthright man of stern Pnn Mi\e Fr a s er and his Cabinet colleagues, such.as Mr. McLagan^ . ■ stood shoulder to shoulder and from the floor they received good support but it became apparent as the day wore on that though the Prime Minister 's proposal could be carried, there wOuld «snr»h i laree nerceutage of opposition that the victory would be no ^ctoiw ahalf and that there would be left a legacy of bitterness and dissatisfaction that might, in the end, defeat the Government in its purpose Mr. Fraser therefore took the alternative course, •maintained unitv, avoided unphvasantness and received an endorsement of the principles that an adequate and efficient- defence of New Zealand was necessary- and that full provision be made for this as well as the maximum contribution possible t9 the defence of the BritiMi Commonwealth.

Finallv, the eonfereuee rcquestecl tiie Government to use ali the resourees ot the country for its deiem-e but it are not readily availahle, requested it to seek the electors' views by a reteiendum, on whether _or not eompulson national service he introauced. From the point of view of the Prime Minister and Government, the resurt ■wh-s far from satisfactory hut from tlie point of view of the rank and file attending the conference, the decision was hailed with glee as indicating not oniy that the conference was run democratically hut also that it was not prepared to accept anything savourmg oi dictation from its leaders. It can be stated that not all of Mr. Fraser's Cabinet colleagues favoured compulsory national service and not all menvbers of the Parliamentarv Labour Party were in attendance at the caucus when the decision to attempt to put it through conference, was taken. in fact there is reasonalde suspicion that more than hlr. Langstone would have opposed the proposition had all been m attendance. Of the debate itself, it can be said that thh president, Mr. James Roberts, sensed opposition to conscription long before anyone else 011 the platform and fefused to applv the closure when it was proposed. "Let them liaye a go, " he said, and he gave free rein to all comers. That many of the speeches in opposition to the proposition were laeking in commonsense, logic and almost everything except sentiment, made little difference. There were many on the conference floor who did not speak but who obviously had their mmds made up to oppose the proposal notwithstanding efforts by Mr. Fraser, Mr. MeLagan, Mr. Moohan and other powerful voiees to sway them and suggestions that they were fooled by the

Communist campaign against conserip- ; tion. ^ ■ ! Mr. A. Grant, of Christchurch, who had moved an almost direet negative to Mr. Fraser's motion by way of an amendinent, quiekly withdrew it when Mr. Fraser altered the wording oi hfs-; motion and so, amidst proionged .. plause, the motion was carried by, votes to 8. *