SURPRISE SUGGESTION

Evening Star, Issue 23378, 22 September 1939, Page 3

SURPRISE SUGGESTION

OPPOSITION LEADER RECOMMENDS THE CLOSURE [From Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, September 21. An unusual suggestion was made in the House of Representatives last night during the committee stages of the Small Farms Amendment Bill, when the Leader of the Opposition appeared to chide the Government for not applying the closure to bring the debate to an end. Mr Hamilton’s comments were prompted by suggestions from the other side of the House that the Opposition was stonewalling the measure, and it appeared to have the desired effect,- for the Bill was passed shortly afterwards. “ The country is at war,” said Mr Hamilton, “ and I don’t know what listeners-in will think when they hear us discussing chicken feed like this.” Government Members; It is the Opposition’s fault. ■ You are stonewalling the Bill. Such a suggestion was nonsense, Mr Hamilton retorted. The Government did not have its measures ready, and was glad to, fill in time. If the war legislation had been ready the closure would have been applied so ithat the House could got on with its work. The Acting Prime Minister (Mr Fraser) skid lie was surprised to hear such a suggestion from the Leader of the Opposition, but he had been looking for guidance and had got it. Mr Hamilton had said that_ the Government was not ready with its legislation. It was true that the legislation would not bo ready before Tuesday, but he was anxious to clear up the Order Paper before then. He did not want to deny the Opposition the right to protest against legislation they thought was not suitable to their supporters, hut the Leader of the Opposition had suggested a way of getting on with the " Mr Poison: Ton don’t need to apply the closure. We will get through. Mr Hamilton: I said that because ot the interjections from the Government benches. • ■ . , . Mr Fraser said ho did not wish to apply the closure, but he wanted the Bill disposed of during the sitting. If it was not passed within a reasonable time he would take the hint of the Leader of the Opposition. When clause 5 of the Bill was reached Mr Broadfoot moved that sub-clause 4 should be deleted. This suh-clause stated that the lease should not confer on the lessee any right to acquire the fee simple of any land comprised therein. Mr Broadfoot’s motion was rejected by 36 votes to 22. , Mr Hamilton then moved a further amendment to sub-clause, 10 of the same clause, which provides tor a nuniper of repeals to the principal Act. This was refected by 37 votes to 22. and the Bill was passed.