TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1924. The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. MR LYSNAR AND THE GOVERNMENT.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXI, Issue 9847, 28 October 1924, Page 4

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1924. The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. MR LYSNAR AND THE GOVERNMENT.

Tile electors of Gisborne bad, no doubt, been awaiting, with great interest, anything further which Mr TV. D. Lysnav would deem fit to say on the Meat Export Amendment Bill, seeing that the Government had not agreed to accept as its policy without Parliamentary investigation, certain amendments proposed by him. Unquestionably what had acted as sauce to their appetite in this regard was the threat by the Member for Gisborne that, when the third reading debate was reached, he intended to ! give the Minister for Agriculture tlie warmest half-hour he had ever had in hisffpolitical career! Mr Lysnav | certainly adopted a characteristic atI tituffe on the matter, but he. does not | s ocm to have realised that he was handling what would appear to have hden a boomerang. Nor does it seem trust he "estimated bis intended op-ponent-in-chief and liis colleagues at their true fighting value. It certainly also turns out that he made a stupid mistake in giving such glaring warning of his intentions. To be forewarned is, of course, to bo forearmed. Thus it came about that Mr Lysnar found Mr-Nosworthy and his Ministerial comrades armed to the teeth and their slogan appears to have been “No quarter.” In the absence of a. fuller report of the proceedings, we do not care, at tills juncture, to say much about the wrangling which took place. Mr Lysnar' went as far as he could in suggesting that the time was ripe for a change of government. But ho could not have anticipated that his claim iii that direction would have resulted in him being made a. target for what were intended as perhaps the hardest knocks delivered against any politician "by his erstwhile friends in the Parliament of this Dominion. At the best—from Mr Lysnar’s point of view—lie was denounced as a political hypocrite in that, despite bis persistent assaults on all forms of so-called trusts and combines, he had allegedly attempted to have dealings in connection with the Poverty Bay Meat Co.’s late works with two fa-ms which had come under his own lash. But little more remains to be said. To-day he stands discredited, politically, by the party which he went to Parliament to assist and which he did assist until it refused to allow him liis own way on an important- policy matter. He has not much choice as to what should bo bis next step. If he is unwilling to allow himself to bo disciplined politically, he should resign in justice to himself and his constituents and test the point as to whether lie can again secure the support of thoso who sent him to Parliament.