“NOT A BRIBE”

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 20915, 15 October 1942, Page 2

“NOT A BRIBE”

OFFER TO MINERS PREMIER IN REPLY AMENDMENT MOVED (P.R.) WELLINGTON, this 'day. An amendment to the no-confidence motion was moved in the House of Representatives last night by the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. P. Fraser, in the following terms: “This House pledges anew its united and wholehearted support for the Government and the War Cabinet in the conduct of the war effort, and expresses its determination, as representatives of.all the people in the Dominion, to'prosecute that war effort with singleness of purpose and undiminished energy until victory for the cause of democracy and freedom is won.” In moving that amendment, Mr. Fraser said he felt certain that the ooinion of the House would be more thoroughly represented and the wishes and hearts of the people mure thoroughly expressed by their representatives. As he listened to Mr. Holland, he wondered if he was in a New Zealand House of Representatives with the Japanese only a few hundred miles away. He had wondered also what had been the directing keynote of the honourable gentleman’s utterances and the inspiration of his actions, but that had been revealed to him by what Mr. Holland had said in discussing a certain document.

Mr. Holland had said that the mineowners had been robbed of their mines. The honourable gentleman’s heart bled for the mine owners because, for the time being, they were sharing control instead of having absolute control. That was not robbing them of the mines. The mines were theirs and would be theirs at the end of the war. Their property would be handed back without any capital loss to them. The term “rob” was. a misconception of the actual position. It was wrong, according to Mr. Holland, to control the mines, but if was not wrong to control lives and take young men and send them out to fight and die for us. To talk about robbery under such circumstances was to place the user of the term out of court. Owners Safeguarded

Everv step was taken, continued the Prime Minister, to safeguard the capital and profits of the owners. It was contended that coal was of secondary importance to enforcing the law. Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Nat., Central Otago): Was not the real issue who should govern in this country? The Prime Minister suggested that Mr. Bodkin could discuss that with his leader. He had been informed by the chairman of the New Zealand Co-operative Dairy Company that if the strike, continued it would mean the collapse of the dairy industry within a few' days. The Leader of the Opposition had said that he had suggested an alternative to the imprisonment of 180 mihers and this was to let the majority go and imprison the ringleaders. This was not enforcing’the law regardless of the conseauences, .=■<■> that the Principle for which Mr. Holland said he stood went into limbo.

Mr. Fraser agreed that the Leader of the Opposition had tackled financial questions earnestly and successfully, and it was no the speaker which had prevented him from continuing. that service. • His action,.in leaving the Administration was thus shown to' be worse than ever. Ordinary methods of finance in wartime were impossible,* for after the entry of Japan into the war, the country had to undertake a gigantic programme of building and other requirements. A system -had to be adopted which Was onen to criticism normally—that of a master schedule instead, of tenders, and it would be strange if, in the exbenditure of millions, everyone was efficient and above reproach. But the War Cabinet took steps to control the expenditure and to secure full details of what was proposed, and the Treasury would not. allow a diversion of expenditure to other purposes without the issue of a new authority from the War Cabinet. The Prime Minister reminded the House that he had been prepared to agree to a National Government but there could be no basis for this unless one was sure of loyal co-operation. He had hoped that the success of the War Administration would lead: to a National Government, though there were grave doubts among the members of. his own party. But the War Administration-was smashed, and he considered that the action of those who resigned showed a lack of appreciation of the issues at stake.. State Control Proposal Turning to the origin of the proposal for State control of the mines, the Prime Minister explained that immediately he returned from the United States the Minister of Mines, the Hon. P. C. Webb, raised the question with him. In addition, he 'understood that the Rt. Hon. J. G- Coates had discussed it with; the coal owners, who said they did not like it, but they were reasonable. He understood that the matter had been discussed by members of the War Cabinet. Unfortunately, it was mentioned at a meeting in Huntly, but if anybody claimed that the idea originated with the miners or that they were' offered it as a bribe, they were incorrect.

Referring to. the* seamen’s strike in 1934, the Prime Minister skid that if the Government in that year was justified—and he believed it was justified —’in winning industrial peace for the country, then the present Government was justified a thousand times in what it had done to get peace and coal in the Waikato. But the present Government did hot go so far as the 1934 Government’ because,; instead of remitting the sentences, it had merely suspended them, and thev could and would be made to operate if the conditions were not observed. The Prime Minister said that the basis of unity in the country had been irretrievably destroyed by Mr.’ Hollands action. He regretted the strike and the' attitude of the miners and he. greatly regretted the fact thafc the Ministers had emulated the miners a nd. in effect, had struck because one of them could not get his own way. It was a bad day’s work to split the unity that had been achieved. The Prime Minister’s amendment was seconded by the Minister of Supply, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan.