TERMS USED IN HOUSE

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 108, 31 January 1935, Page 9

TERMS USED IN HOUSE

Member Will Not Withdraw BELIEVES WORDS TRUE London, January 29. In the House of Commons Mr. Holford-Knight (Nab. Lib.) raised the question of the language Mr. G. Buchanan (Lab.) used last night, suggesting that it was an insult to the House. He pointed out that certain phrases did not appear in the official report. Sir D. A. Herbert (C.). who was also chairman when Mr. Buchanan spoke last night, said that even a chairman was human arid might let pass things which should have been disallowed. No appeal was made to him yesterday regarding Mr. Buchanan's language or it would have been immediately dealt with. Mr. Buchanan said that he came to the House yesterday direct from a constituency where there was terrible poverty. He had said things which, if lie had been cool, calm, and collected, he might not have said, but at the same time he was terribly sorry he could not withdraw words which he believed true. Mr. G. Buchanan. (Lab.) declared: “Mr. MacDonald climbed into wealth and power on the pence of the people he is now robbing. lie is a mountebank. He is worse. He is a swine. He is a low, dirty cur who ought to be flung out and horsewhipped from public life. He is the head of a Government engaged in a brutal conspiracy to smash the family life of the country. lie is a coward because he is not present at the debate on the subject. He may die honoured in the end. but will possibly be deservedly cursed by thousand? of decent, kindly souls who this winter's night in Scotland are suffering what nobody cap tell.” SCALES OF RELIEF Criticism of Government STATEMENTS IN REPLY (British Oflicial Wireless.) Rugby, January 29. During the debate on the new relief regulations inaugurated by the Unemployment Assistance Board, criticism was directed to reductions in the amount of relief in some areas. The Minister of Labour, the lion. Oliver Stanley, recalled that reductions in areas where administration had been lax and even illegal were anticipated, He thought also that there were cases where inexperienced officials of the new system had not used their discretion, as was expected in making assessments. It was, however, too early- to judge the new system as a whole. The Under-Secretary for Labour, Mr. R. S. Hudson, speaking later in the debate, attributed the reductions which were the subject of criticism to former laxity in the administration, to the stricter definition of the households, and to the increased earnings of households. But ou the whole more money bad been distributed tills year and the increase would amount in all to £3,000.000 annually. He asked dissatisfied applicants to exercise their right of appeal, to tribunals. Every effort had been made to ensure (hat those bodies were competent and sympathetic. Mr. George Lansbury, Leader of the Opposition, a Press Association cable states, moving to report progress, said that he hoped that all sections of the Labour Party would join and tell the Government that they would not tolerate regulations entailing the wholesale starvation of men, women and children. Mr. Baldwin said that the Government intended, as far as possible, to adjust unfair hardships and injustices. Sir Herbert Samuel (L.) said that the Liberals must join in the protests against the regulations, though they disapproved of the recent scene. Mr. Lansbury’s motion was rejected by 2-13 votes to 73. The lion. Oliver Stanley, Minister of Labour, said that instructions had already been issued to administer the regulations fairly without causing hardship. The supplementary vote was carried.