WELLINGTON TOPICS.

Hokitika Guardian, 9 October 1922, Page 1

WELLINGTON TOPICS.

LOYALTY AND SOCIALISM. A PARTY CRY. SPECIAL TO GUARDIAN. WELLINGTON, Oct, 6. It was inevitable that the speech delivered by the Prime Minister at Levin during tho week-end, in which he implied that the approaching general election would he a contest between the loyal Reformers and the disloyal Socialists, would create some stir in tho House of Representatives. At the time Mr Massey was speaking at Levin, Mr George Forbes, the member for Huruiiui, and Mr W. A. Veitcli, the member for Wanganui, were addressing a large gathering at Hastings in support of a Liberal-Labour candidate who is promising to give Mr 11. M. Campbell a hard fight for the Hawkes Bay seat. It was not till Wednesday, when the report of the Sessional Committee on the rival petitions of the Post and Telegraph Department employees concerning affiliation with the Alliance of Labour was being discussed, that they got their opportunity to adequately denounce the Minister’s aspersion upon the loyalty of the Liberal-Labour Party. Having gently rebuked the Postmaster-General for a mis-statement of facts in regard to the attitude of the Opposition towards the petitions, Mr Veitcli passed on to the Levin speech and declared that any one who called him or his party disloyal was a shameless perverter of the truth. A BREEZY INTERLUDE.

Mr Massey promptly jumped to bis feet, and called the attention of the Speaker to the offensive words. ITo wanted the member for Wanganui and the world at large to understand that neither inside nor outside the House would he allow anyone to call him a liar and escape unscathed. Mr Veitch, who is of the plegmatic temperament that is not easily moved to wrath, was surprised and pained hv Mr Massey’s vehemence. It never had occurred to him to doubt the Minister’s personal veracity, but if the leader of the Government or any one else' questioned his loyalty he would not hesitate to brand him as a perverter of the truth. The Speaker was allowing members much lattitude at the time, and.Mr Massey did not press his point. He ultimately compromised by saying that if the policy of the Liberal Party were the policy of Mr Holland it would be disloyal. The Liberals laughed and were content to leave it at that, but Mr Forbes, speaking in lighter vein and with characteristic good humour, went on to remind the Prime Minister of the 1 days when ho was coquetting with Labour and doing his best to win its goodwill.

THE DISLOYALTY BOGEY. If this entertaining digression from the discussion of the Post and Telegraph petitions did nothing else it helped to show the utter hollowness of the disloyalty bogey. Even Air Massey was compelled to admit that many of the Liberals and many of the workers wore as loyal as he was himself—wliibh was saying a great deal—and ho was ready with no concrete instance of disloyalty. Mr Holland is under suspicion, of course, hut this gentleman’s disloyalty is rather a pose than a conviction. Of a certainty, ns Mr Forlies suggested, if the Labour leader were at the head of a majority in the House of Representatives the Union Jack would still float over Parliament Buildings, and the Constitution would he as zealously guarded as it is at the- present time. In the circumstances it seems a little ridiculous for the heads of the older parties to Ik? renouncing all association with Labour. It is not probable hut it is within the range of possibility that Labour will hold the balance of power in the new Parliament. What then ?

AFFILIATION. The report of the Sessional Committee upon the petitions for and against affiliation around which much of the discussion revolved, was a perfectly innoxious document. It merely recommended that the petitions should he referred to the Government for consideration, which is the recognised way of shifting responsibility on to the shoulders of "the Executive and leaving it to do as it thinks well. Of course the Government was strongly opposed to idea of affiliation, and though the small minority led by Mr Holland managed to maintain a counter demonstration over a couple of sittings it never had any hope of making an impression upon tl'e House or the country. The petiiion in favour of affiliation had the larger number of signatures, but the one' on the other side seemed to carry more weight with members, and their decision is generally approved by public opinion.