ELECTORS, PLEASE NOTE

Hokitika Guardian, 7 November 1928, Page 2

ELECTORS, PLEASE NOTE

AX UXA XS W !•: RFI) q u KSTIOX X AIR li

A.DDHKSSKI) TO MR HOLLAND

AY men Do They R eimmmate ? In concluding n vigorous attack upon the Labour Party's policy and actions. .Mr L. M. fsitl. M.l’., on August oth. I! 'Jo, put the following very pointed questions to the Labour Leader, questions that have not been answered up to date, silence giving assent to the suggestions contained in the subject matter giving rise to the questions:— (1) 'Lite lion, member for Muller, the Leader of the Revolutionary Socialists, on one occasion urged the late Premier to violate government contracts by reducing the interest on national loans: and when .Mr .Massey said. “ I cannot, commit repudiation.” the member lor Muller replied, “ Repudiation. What is interest—something for nothing.” Do the members of his party support his statement, that ” Interest is something for nothing?” Do urge the Government to reduce the agreedupon rate of interest on Government loans; or do they repudiate their leader ? Robbing the Mobtgagee. (2) The hot), member (Mr Holland'! replying to the hon. member for Gisborne. admitted that if under the land system ho was advocating the farmer got his due nothing would be left 'for the mortgagee. (See Hansard, Vol. 203, i> 292.). Does the Revolutionary Socialist Party deliberately and knowingly advocate a system that they think will benefit the farmers, but rob all the mortgagees ol (lie money borrowed from them? Do They Condemn Go-Si,ow”? /;() The lion, member for Muller denies that “ go-slow ” is practised in New Zealand? It is a denial that contradicts tacts known to us all. One o'l the Welliiigtoii-Christehurrli lorry beats was recently plastered with notices advocating “ go-slow.” I have never heard the Jlon. Member’s followers condemn ” go-slow ’ as dishonest, subversive of true manhood, and an utterly unworthy weapon to use. Will they condemn it now. or by silence give it their consent i Mueedinc Discontent. C|) The Revolutionary Socialists demand from the Government huge ninl immediate expenditure that they know no Government could possibly meet, in order to increase the discontent of the worker and win votes. Can Tiii'.v Deny This? 1.-,) They have condemned this Government for excessive borrowing. Will they tell us definitely where the money for this expenditure is to come from? Sympathy with Rcssia. (15) "With otic exception, these lion, members united in a message ol sympathy and condolence to the Russian Soviet over the death oi the monster Lenin—a man who murdered his way to power, who violated every principle of democracy, who suppressed the right of public meetings, and the press H hostile to him.

Mow (I ops this squiiro with their recent pli;ii))pioiislti|) ol Lyons (lli»“ ( b'portin') ami tlipir protpst against l lie suppression of revolutionary literature here:- Mow does it si|U;ire with their loud profession ot democratic principles ? Auk Tiikv I.oyai. ? (7) The hon. memliers ol the I’evolutionarv Socialist Party claim to lie loyal. They take the oath of allegiance to the K i iilc. Wlicii the Irish Rebellion broke out. their oflicial organ, the “ Mnorilaiul Worker’ rpjuiced that this was the lirsl step in breaking up the British Kmpirc. The other day. the chid promoter of their Socialist Sunday Schools stall'd lie would rather pray lor a weasel, than 'lor a king ! When the Prince of Whiles, the heir to the throne, visited the Dominion, the “ M.aoriland Worker” held him up to ridicule. Now, if ‘‘The Dominion” or the “Lyttelton Times” printed sentiments of this kind with what vigour and in dignat ion would Reformers and Liberals repudiate them. Why have we never heard one word of disavowal or condemnation I rofn the lion, memliers on my Idt ? It thc\ are loyal— Why? Indt:sti!lai. I’akmamknts.

(S) Have they ahaiidoned their claim to industrial Parliaments, or do they sti-ll want the present system ol Parliamentary Government broken up. and industrial Parliaments established ? All! lIoU.ANd’k Dtf.KM.MA. “ lU'fore they go to the election.” said Mr fsitt. “it. is only right and proper to know whether these questions are based mi misunderstanding, or whether they (the Labour Party) do stand to these principles. The hon. member for Duller should tell hon. members whether he regards interest a* something for nothing, and whethei he regards as an honest and reputable action for any Government to reduce the agreed-upon rate of interest lor Government loans, and by their repudiation blemish the reputation of this country heforo the whole civilised world.” Air Holland should tell the eountrv whether he is opposed to “ goslow ” and whether he would recant his utterance that the Labour Party s motto was not “ a fair day’s work for ;1 fair day’s pay.” If Mr Holland bar any decency and honesty in him lie would say that that was the motto he would stand by. Why should Mr Holland want to alter that motto? Du’ lie want an unfair day’s pay tor an unfair day’s work? “Ho has landed himself in a dilemma that will ta c some time to extricate himself from, remarked Air Isitt, who asked the l ; ' | m ttr speaker who was to lollow him not to treat him as a Judas Iscariot, or a tool of the Capitalist class, hut to answer the questions.

Mr Holland declined to answer the questions, and no other member oi iiiparty lias so far attempted to do so.

To tiiis mav be added the ouestion

" Why did Mr Peter Fraser, the member for Wellington Central, then a member of the Wellington City Council, rein sc to sign the address ol loyalty to the Prince of Wales, presented to His Royal Highness by (lie ('oimci I ? ' ’