MR. SPEAKER'S RULING

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 257, 24 July 1920, Page 8

MR. SPEAKER'S RULING

LABOUR LEADER'S ' CHALLENGE A CRUSHING DEFEAT .. THE IRISH QUESTION The Prima Miuister gave Mr. Holland an opportunity last night to submit his motion disagreeing with tho ruling of Mr. Speaker. Mr. Massey said that ho was giving this opportunity at the request of Mr. Speaker. It will be remembered that Mr. Holland gavo notice of a motion regarding tho state of affairs in Ireland, which Mr. Speaker ruled out of order, with the result that it did not appear on the Order Paper. In effect, Mr. Holland asked the House to pass condemnation on the policy of tho British Government in relation to Ireland, and Mr. Speaker held that this was not proper subject matter for a motion to go to the New Zealand Parliament. Mr. Speaker mado the following statement before the question was opened: "Before I call upon Mr. Holland to move his notice of motion I hope I ir.ay be permitted by indulgence of the House I think it is understood that Mr. Speaker can take no part in tho discussion—to state my Tcason for ruling

this motion out of order. It was 111 leferenco to the last portion of tho motion, demanding withdrawal of troops fr 01 ) 1 Ireland. That was my reason for disallowing the motion, because I looked upon it in this way-it would be handing over Ireland to outrage and murder to the enemies of the Empire and Great Britain, and to those who wished to have a republic in Ireland. I looked upon the motion for this reason as not proper to "o on the Order Paper of a House members have all or den clared allegiance to the King.. Jlat is tho reason for which I did not allow it to go on the Order Paper. Mr. Massey's Hope The Prime Minister said: Before the discussion commences, Mr. Speaker, I wish to say that 1 do hope the. discussion will be limited to the quest on of whether Mr. Speaker lias a right and I believe he has-to rule out ot oidei a motion such as the member tor Buller attempted to move. I hope we are not going to discuss from an anti-Imperial point of view—l aril speaking not- only of the House collectively, but of members individually—the very serious state of affairs which exists so near to the heart of tho Empire. If we can t do tho Empire any good I hope that no member of the New Zealand Parliament will atteinDt to do it any serious mJU Mr. Holland: Don't you think that in quite uncalled for? ' • ' ' „ , Mr. Sneaker then called on Mr. Holkjlr". Holland moved his motion as follows: "That Mr. Speaker's, ruling that the notice of motion by the member tor Buller, in favour of self-determination for the Irish 'people and condemning tho military occupation of Ireland is not in order be .disagreed with." He quoted his original 110t.ee of' motion, as iollows: "That, whereas it is claimed that the recent war was entered into by Britain and fought by the Allies to reestablish tile principle of self-determina-tion and to protect the rights of small nationalities, this House, viewing, with apprehension the tragical situation whicii has developed in Ireland as the; direct outcome of the demand of the right of self-government to the Irish people, and fully convinced that tho problems which arise in any country can bo settled only by the people of that country, respectfully claims ; for our kith and kin !u Ireland that full measure of self"etermjnation for which the soldiers of New "Zealand, including many sons of ireland, believed they were fighting, and to establish which so many thousands yielded their lives on. tho battlefield. This House further records i T s unqualified condemnation of the military occupation' of Ireland, and urges an immediate cessation of tho application of martial law, and the immediate withdrawal of the army of occupation." The reasons for disallowing the motion had been stnted'by Mr. Speaker, he said but 110 could find nothing in the Standing Orders of the House by which his motion could be rejected as a breach of order. He argued that the Parliament .of New Zealand had a right to disapprove of any action of the Imperial Gov eminent, and that contrariwise the NewZealatid Parliament must have the righ|t to disapprove of any act of tho Imperial Government. He mentioned, cases of resolutions, which, in His opinion, wero similar to his own, in character, and which were carried bv the Now Zealand % House of Representatives. Mr. Holland quoted

precedents, also, from the Australian Parliament and from other Dominion Parliaments. Ho kopt strictly to tho question of whether or not his motion was in order, and did not touch the subject matter of his original motion. ,Mr. P. Eraser (Wellington Central) seconded the motion. A Simple Question. The Prime Minister said that tho best thing to.- do woifld be to go straight to a division, and dispose of the Question, The League of Nations, which had been mentioned, had nothing to do with the matter. The constitution of the League mado it perfectly clear that one State would never be permitted (to interfere in the local affairs of another State. The question was simply whether or'not the House would support tho ruling of-,the Speaker, and the sooner it was disposed of (the better. He had no doubt about tho decision of tho House. ' Mr. A. Ngata (Eastern Maop) said the ruling was not given on the Standing Orders, but oil the likelihood of tho motion being regarded as dislo.val to the Empire. Precedents for a motion criticising tho actions of another Parliament within the Empire could be quoted. But a new precedent was being created, and he believed it \ras a. sound one. Ho would support the Sneaker Mr. Holland, in his reply, contended that a' motion asking for self-determina-tion for Irelnnd was not disloyal. 1 Ho went on to refer rather more closely than he had previously done to the eul> ject matter of his motion. He believed, lie said, that the British policy in Ireland was one that would bring bloodshed, death, and disaster to Ireland, already on the brink of revolution. Ha had not discussed these matters because lie thought it would be botter to have this matter decided on the forms of tho, House and on the Standing Orders. The whole question before the House was whether. Mr. Speaker was.right or wrong in his decision.

Reasons for the Ruling. Mr. Speaker asked leave to say something more about his reasons for ruliug as he had. He had not ruled the honourable member out of order, he said, on any of the matters he had been debating. All the motion except the last portion was in order. Ho had not ruled it out because it dealt with Homo Rule or self-determination for. Ireland. This was proved by the fact that ho had allowed a similar motion to go on tho Order Paper in last Parliament. Notices of motion were in the hands of tho Speaker to use his discretion as to whether they should go on the Order Paper. Tho Speaker could stop a motion on account of its being "irregular, unbecoming or objectionable in character." He had ruled this motion out on account of the last portion, urging er demanding tho immediate withdrawal of troops from Ireland- It was when ho considered what the effect of this wculd be—that it would mean handing over tho country to the enemies of tho Empire and Great Britain who desired a republic in Ireland, that ho had ruled tho motii/n out. He had ruled that it was not a proper motion to go on the Order Paper of a Houso every , member of which had either sworn or declared allegiance to the King. A division was taken on the motion, and it was defeated bv 11 votes to 4. The four who voted for tho motion were Messrs. Holland, Eraser, Parry, and Savage, the only Labour members present. The other four members of the Labour croup, • Messrs. Howard, M'Combs, Sullivan, and Bartrain, Haired in favour of the motion.