Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WHAT HAS LABOUR DONE?

("Post" Speeial Commissioner.)

ATTACK iN HOUSE MR. STALLWORTHY FINDS GOVTl PREFERABLE TO OF-POSITION NO-CONFIDENCE AMENDMENT

Wellington, Tuesday. Another amendnient to the Labour Party's no-confidence motion was launched in the House of Representatiy.es this afternoon when Mr. H. Atmore (Ind- Nelson) moved to add the words "owing to the Government's action in decreasing old age, widows', miners' and other pensiohs." Mr. Atmore contended that the policy of wage reductions was only aggravating the position. In his opinion, the eure for the situation was credit and currency reform in order to increase the purchasing power of the people. His arguments were based on the now well worn theme of currency manipulation which he preached together with Mr. A. N. Field, during the recess. Mr. A. J. Stallworthy (Ind. Eden), who f ollowed, , said that no currency reform could he

achieved through a no-confidence motion, though the overhaul of banking and currency methods was long overdue. It was distinctly unf air of Mr Atmore ito move the amendment in the way he had. the amendment sought, not the re-

instatement of pensions, but to place the Labour Party on th'e Treasury benehes, which was a different thing. He was not entirely satisfied with the Government's policy, but wtas less satisfied with the Labour Party. Wrdng In Principle To have a major question affecting the lives of the people interfered with by a mere party machine was wrong in principle, vicious in practice and discreditable to the politicians.

He contended that Labour had done nothing since it broke .away from the Liberal-Labour Federation. Mr. H. T. Armstrong (Labour, Christchurch East): You ratfced from the Liberal Party to save the Tories. Mr. Stallworthy said he looked forward to the day when the masses would have effective representation iii the House and anything he could do in that direction, would be heartily done. School Text Books Mr. Stallworthy said he considered the school text-book contract had been a grave exploitation of the parents by the present holders of the contract. The stupid action of the Minister in extending the contract had cost the parents between £8000 and £10,000 yearly for four years. The action of the Minister seemed to show a contempt for the representative Chamher. Mr. J. A. Lee (Labour, Grey Lynn) : The party funds? Mr. Stallworthy: I don't know what you mean. Rising to a point of order, Mr Coates asked whather the remark from the Opposition henches suggesting that the party funds were a cause of th'e contract constituted a breach privilege. On the Speaker's ruling, Mr. Lee withdrew stating: "I have no ohjection to withdrawing. Do I understand though, that if one suggests that an organisation might assist a party if that party's policy were favourahle to it, one would put oneself out of order in this House?" Mr. Speaker: I thiiik that is rather outside the question. Excited Attitude "I was astounded at the excited attitude of Mr. Stallworthy," said Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West) who added that Mr. Stallworthy had asked what Labour had done since it had cut adrift from the Liberal-La-bour federation. The Labour Party had kept the remnants of the Liberal party — United Pary — in office for two years. The Labour Party had supported the United Government until it was betrayed and the United Party had joined its life-long political opponents on a campaign of wage reductions. Mr. Stallworthy was eomplaining, but he himself had assisted in the betrayal. He advised Mr. Stallworthy to vote the Government out. The debate terminated at 7.20 p.m. and as the bells, rang for the division, there was laughtef from the Labour benehes when Mr. A. M. Samuel (Govt. Thames) left the Chamber. Mr. Atmore's motion was defeated by 39 votes to 26. He was supported by Mr. H. M. Rushworth (Ind. Bay of Islands), Mr. E. T. Tirikatene (Ratana) and the Labour members. The amendment was rejecied by 40 votes to 26. The Preihier then read the Budget.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RMPOST19321005.2.18

Bibliographic details

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 345, 5 October 1932, Page 5

Word Count
664

WHAT HAS LABOUR DONE? Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 345, 5 October 1932, Page 5

WHAT HAS LABOUR DONE? Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 345, 5 October 1932, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert