THE COUNTRY PARTY.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4403, 19 April 1922, Page 3

THE COUNTRY PARTY.

THE OHINEMURI SEAT. SELECTION ON SATURDAY. The proposal of the Auckland provincial executive of 'the New Zealand Farmers’ Union to nominate candidates for the forthcoming general election. was furthered by the Movrinsville branch of the union, states the Morrinsville “Star,” when it. was decided that the Ohinemuri seat should be contested and that a delegate be elected to attend a. conference at Te Arpha on April 22, io select a candidate. Mr P. S. Phiipott presided over a large attendance. The Auckland provincial office advised that the executive had decided on a political campaign and had elected Mr A. A. Ross as leader. Conferences should be held to elect 'candidates as soon as possible. The election expenses would be met by subscriptions raised locally. Correspondence was received from the organiser of the Thames Valley sub-provincial executive, who invited the branch to express its views on the question Of contesting the Ohinemuri electorate. The letter pointed out that loyal support of the wishes of the majority}, whatever that majority might decide on, was the first essential of success in suchi /an undertaking, and indeed the first vir-

tue in unionism. Mr R. C, Allen explained that the Auckland and Thames Valley executives desired the branches to select delegates for a conference in Te Aroha on . April 22' and to instruct them whether the branches wanted the Ohinemuri seat .contested or not. After th a 1 Mr Allen suggested that the delegates be given a free hand. Mr C. M. Hume said that now the Union had set its hand to the plough it should proceed with the political campaign. He moved that. Mr R- C. Allen represent the Morrinsvilie branch. . Mr Allen said he would be at the conference in any case, but. would not have a vote. He was pledged to support the proposal, and it might happen that the branch would turn the proposal down. For that .reason . he could not, accept nomination. Several members were Dominated, but declined on the ground tha.t tliey. were in the Tauranga electorate. Mr 0. Glynn declined on the ground that he was opposed to the principle of the Union entering politics. .He regarded the vote as a sacred right/ and did /not thipk the individual farmer would be influenced by the resolutions of the Union. Mr W. McLachlan questioned tne right of members who, were Tauranga electors having a say on the question of nominating a candidate for the Ohinemuri electorate. He did not think the Union was- strong enough to take political action. Mr E. Bodmin, an Ohinemuri elector, was finally elected to represent the Morrfnsyille branch as a delegate to the Te Arpha conference.. Mr L, H. McAlpine moved: “Th,at the branch’s delegate be instructed to vote in favour of, the Union contesting'the Ohiiiemuri seat, and when that question is decided the delegate be given a free. hand. Mr F. Colbecß seconded and quoted the various measures that had been adopted by the Government to assist the workers. He said these things were so ridiculously and glaringly > against the interests of the farmers that surely it was time that such anomalies were put right. Mr Colbeck appealed for support of political action, and said that the result of a decision 4 to contest a seat would be the increase in th©. membership of ' the Union. The Union’s representatives in the House would be independent ..and the farmers’ grievances would be ventilated and unfair measures would, he hoped, be removed. He denied that the Union was enter- - ing on party politics.: If the Union did not proceed with its- political, action at the forthcoming, election he would never again have anything to do with the Union. He said the Union did not wan.t to have anything to do with parties. It wanted independent

members.. •Mr J. B. Thomas: But you call H the Country -Party. Mr Coltfeek: That is only a name. There can be no party if there is no opposition. Mr Thomas reiterated his opposition to the proposal on the lines referred to by him at previous meetings. He seriously questioned the advisability of entering politics on the ground of splitting the votes and giving Labour candidates the chance of slipping in. The present was a critical time; and was no time for a change. He would go so far as to concede thaSt the Union should proceed with its. campaign provided that oh a no confidejice motion the farmers’ candidates pledge themselves to support the Massey Government. Mr Thomas moved an amendment on the lines he suggested.. Mr Allen pointed out that Mr Ross, the, leader, had already laid it down that the party must be formed on the principle of independence. McAlpine and Seifert pointed out that the meeting must adhere to the Auckland executive’s instructions to vote on the questions submitted, namely: (1) Do you wish the Country Party .to contest the Ohinemuri electorate ? (2) If so, .will you support the candidate suggested -by your, executive? (3) If not, who do you select as your candidate ? Mr McAlpine said Waihou farmers had told him that if the Union did not nominate a candidate they would support Labour. He went on to say that he sVas. sure there was hot a hope of the Labour Party, securing a majority in the House. In England, Canada, and Australia Labour’s day was done. He was perfectly, sure that the salvation of. the country depended pn the success of the farmers’ party. Only w;hen the party had men in the House would the Union have that cohesion which was so desirable. Politics was one of the two tihlngs which men regarded with an abiding interest, and* it was only when the Union entered politics that Interpirt in the Union would be kept

alive. The life of the Union depended on the question whether the venture was proceeded with or not. Mr Thomas’ amendment was regarded as a negative and put of order. Mr McLachlan moved as an amendment that no action be taken.. The president (Mr P. S. Philpott) expressed the view th/it Mr McLachlan’s amendment, would show that the Union was side-stepping the proposal. There was no seconder to the amendment. The motion was carried. Messrs McLachlan, Thomas', Glynn, and Philpott voted against the motion. Mr McAlpine moved and Mr Colbeck seconded : “That the delegate be given a free hand in connection with the vote for the (selection of a candidate. The motiop was ■ carried without dissent.