POSSIBILITIES OF POSTPONEMENT

Hokitika Guardian, 1 September 1931, Page 3

POSSIBILITIES OF POSTPONEMENT

GENERAL .ELECTION. PARTY LEADERS QUESTIONED IN HOUSE. WELLINGTON, August 28. Highly interesting cross talk regarding the possibilities of postponing the general election, or the chances of a dissolution, arose when the Licensing Polls Postponement Bill was in committee of the House this afternoon. A Government amendment had been circulated to make it clear beyond doubt, as the Prime Minister expressed it, that x a licensing poll would be held at the second general election. This amendment had been approved by both interests in the licensing question, and he thought they could be depended on to protect the interests of their respective sides. . • | Mr Howard (Labour, Christchurch South) : No. ~1 do not, admit it. The ; Alliance has let me down. Supposing j the general election is postponed until next March? The Prime Minister: It says “the i second general election.” No point | arises about the date. Whenever the second general election is held there I will be a licensing poll. The first general election will be within a few weeks. ■ J, Members : Oh ! uh! | “Thfit sounds ominous,” commented ’ the leader of the Labour Party, while ! Mr Coates (leader of the Opposition) | suggested correctively the' phrase “a . few months.” The Prime Minister: Well we will say about the end of the year'. (Laughter). Then after that, if a dissolution takes place and Parliament does not run its full period, there will be a licensing poll. There may be one in four years. . REFORMER ASKS' QUEST. ONS. Mr D. Jones (Reform, Mid-Canter-bury) asked what was meant bv the Prime Minister’s statement, first as to the possibility of postponement of the general election, and the statement that Parliament would dissolve in the ordinary course. ' ■, Sir Apirana Ngata and other Minters: “May.” Mr Jones : ' f When another Minister says “may” it opens up the whole question of the meaning of this clause. 1 thought it was the . intention of the House that there should Be a general election shortly, but we find all sorts

of doubts floating around the United benches "and the word “may’' is used. Before we definitely decide on a Bill ol this kind this House wants to know ii the Government succeeds in postponement of the general election for two years. Mr Armstrong (Labour, Christchurch East) : "It all depends on you. Mr Jones: 1 can give my decision in a moment. “Postponement is entirely a matter for the House to decide,” declared the ■Prime Minister, who immediately fol--1 lowed the member for Mid-Canterbury. "I cannot decide it," he added. Mr Howard : Reform can. ’ i The Prime Minister replied that at that stage of the proceedings he was not going to comment other than to repeat that- the question was for the House to decide. LABOUR LEADER’S VIEW. , In the opinion of Mr Holland, leader of the Labour Party, members had to approach the Bill on the assumption j that a general election would take place this year. The Prime Minister, ; he declared, should give an assurance j to that effect. There could be no ex--1 tension of the life of Parliament unless the Reform Party joined with the Gov--1 eminent. v “And the Labour Party, too” interjected Reform members. ■ “The Labour Party,” retorted Mr ■Holland, “will not consent to postponement of the general election under I, any circumstances whatever.” j Mr Samuel (Reform, Thames) : No matter what the state of the country | may be? . I Mr Holland: The statement is definite i and ■ emphatic. The country docs not 1 want postponement of the elections. It would be the { greatest disaster that could happen. It is, very important that the inter-party committee should j continue its work, and there should be no wrangling as to whether the general election should be , postponed or not. I am approaching £his Rill on the assumption that the general election is going to take place. If the Prime Minister has anything else in his mind, it is a. fair thing for ’him to tell us definitely what he proposes to do. It would be far better to allow the interI party committee to conclude its work than postpone the election, because ■that would #mean the end of the committee. The point was made by Mr Savage i(Labour, Auckland n’est) that it was clearly in the hands of Prohibition supporters in the House to prevent a»v extrusion of the life of Parliament ■without taking party sides at all. Air Jones maintained that the Government had definitely stated that it •Mixed an extension of the life of Parliament. That was the interpretation he placed on the statement made tile other day by the Prime Minister, A MATTER FUR PARLIAMENT. The Prime Minister; No. I will explain what I said. The statement of the member for Auckland West was, said Mr Forbis, an effective reply to Air -Jones. Referring, to his own statement in the ' House when the committee was set up, Mr Forbes said lie had said that, if th problems to be facui were so serious and so grave that they could only be dealt with by 'a National Government, and were beyond the power and strength'of-a minority Government to handle, and it was decided to form a National Government to that end, the question of'extension of the life of Parliament would be considered; ‘‘J have no power to form a National Govrnment mysritf,” continued the Prime 'Minister. “If the parties feel that the position of the primary producer is as grave as 1 believe it is, then they must do all they can to help him, and be prepared to set aside anything that will prevent them from according that assistance. I believe the position is sufficiently serious to brush aside any considerations regarding the election or ariyihing else. It is undoubtedly a mattir for members to decide when they see the situation in the same light as I do. 1 cannot make them see it. ELECTION NOT SHIRKED. Mr Foibes observed that, if the Reform and Labour Parties did not agree with his view when tfie situation was quite cle: r, it would be impossible for him to carry out measures in the face of such a position. “I do not want to shirk a: general election,” added the Prime Minister, with some spirit, “Our party has never be n better prepared, regarding candidates that it is at present. (Hear, hear.) The whole organisation is going on, and the attitude I have adopted is not for the purpose of evading the eiee4tion.” (Hear, hear.) OPPOSITION LEADER QUESTIONED. Mr Sullivan (Labour, Avon) said that Mr Coates could clear the whole matter up by outlining the attitude of the official Opposition on the quest,on of postponing the general election. The Prime Minister had stated that if the Reform Party were of the same op.nion as the Labour Party there would be no postponement. A laugh from the Hon. D. Downie .Stewart (Reform, Dunedin West) interrupted Air Sullivan, who continued, “or if Mr Downie Stewart, who is suspected of desiring to flirt with his erstwhile opponents, will speak for Mr Coates we 'will be glad to hear him. It has been suggested that Mr Stewart is anxious to occupy a high position in the House and country as a compromise between the two leaders. I don’t see the member for Dunedin West smiling now. He may be prepared to take the responsibility from his chief's shoulders and make a statement.” ••It gives me much pleasure to reply to your request,” said Mr Coates, leader of the Opposition. "Everything depends

—at the moment one. cannot really approach the position Li-on the finding.-! of-the. inter-party committee and the support the Labour Party will give to those findings. If we can agree, so much the better. If we evolve a plan from that committee, and it is the right one, I believe we have got to live up to it.” “But what does that mean?” asked Mr H. E. Holland. Mr Coates: If in the opinion of the three parties the plan is right, then we must see it through. I don't set ‘ al| y oilier way out. Mr Parry (Labour, Auckland Central) : How do you mean, “See it through ?’’ Mr Coates : Exactly what T sav. I assume our respective "parties wll support what definite scheme we may arrive at for the rehabilitation of New Zealand. Mr Parry : How "do you propose to carry it through ? Air Coates: I have answered the question put to me. 1 cannot see how we can do other than take our hurdles as we reach them. A member: Lucky if you get to them. Mr Coates: I am not goipg to prejudge anything. We will have to think around it. The leader of the Opposition added that it would not do to have the election in the midst of the Christmas holidays. It would have to come long before that. He*considered it would be a great mistake to try to foresee beyond the-stage when the inter-party commitflfee made its final recommendations. His mind was concentrated on that question. Mr Holland : That has nothing to do with the postponement of the general election. A POINTED QUESTION. Mr P. Fraser (Labour, Wellington Central) to Mr 'Coates : Would it be a fair interpretation to say you are prepared to consider postponement of the I report of the inter-party committee? t “Not a fair question,” commented a Government member. Mr Coates: Yes, a fair question. If a plan emerges from the committee, and rt-e agree, it is our duty to get legislation through the House in order io ; bring about the rehabilitation 1 have ' referred to. Many considerations may then come along, and things may crop up. If the unexpected happens—and it would be unexpected if we did have a postponement of the general election —then we would have to consider the question of the effect of the Licensing Bill on the general election and the effect of the general election on the Bill. Mr Sullivan’s interpretation of Mr Coates’s statement was that the Reform had.r had made it clear that the question of postponing the general elec- ( tion was one that would be considered in conjunction with-the findings of the • inter-party committee. . . \ ■