DEBATE CONTINUED.

Shannon News, 16 February 1923, Page 4

DEBATE CONTINUED.

LABOUR LEADER OBJECTS TO CRITICISM. ONE POINT UPHELD. ' WELLINGTON, Last Night. When Parliament resumed ithis morning, the Pre f mier threw out a suggestion, that members should not make their speeches unnecessarily long. 1-Ie saw no reason why the .session could not be finished on Saturday. The ventilation was so bad that sitting in the Chamber was very tuying and soinething would have to be done to improve the building. Mr. Wilford: It is like a conservatory.

Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) resumed the debate, but aroused little tin-' , ter | ,'i. till he declared the Labour members were disloyal.

Mr. Holland rose at once. “Mr. Speaker, a point of order ! I should like you to rule, Sir, whether it is in order for one member to refer to other members as disloyal ? ”

Mr. Speaker: I rule that it is not in order.

A little later, Mr. Lysnar said that some of the Labour members stood for revolution by violence.

Mr. Holland again rose to a point of order. Was a member permitted to say that another member stood for revolution by-violence ?

Mr. Speaker ruled that Mr. Lysnar was justified. The point was different from that previously raised 'by Mr. Holland. Each member, on entering the House had, to take the oath, or affirmation of loyalty, and, therefore, it was not in order to question a inem- . ber’s loyalty. "It was in order, however, to refer to any method advocated to bring about reform. Mr. de la Perelle (Wairau) said the House knew the Government would win the coming' division by three, so they might. as well get to the vote with as little delay as possible. He suggested that Reform should go over to the Liberals, who were the great middle party. Mr. H. T. Armstrong (Labour representative, who has replaced Dr. ,Thacker*for Christchurch East), said if the Government did not go out, it was because some members would not honour their election pledges. Messrs. L. Mcllvride (Napier’s Labour representative) and W. Jordan (the Labour member, who defeated the late Speaker in Manakau) and T. J. Edie (Bruce) were the other speakers before the dinner adjournment. Mr. Jordan, whose speecli, for certain'reasons, was listened to with keen interest, said he resented beipg charged with disloyalty and said that though reafed in poverty, he had fought for Britain. He was charged with being an independent. He had come'to Wellington with an open mind and he refused io be bound to any man and his was hot a vote anyone could rely on. He would support what was in the interests of the people and if the Government would bring in a programme of such legislation he would rush to its assistance. The GovernorGeneral's Speech contained no promise of needed and consequently he must vote with the Labour Party. He opposed the Reform Government conscientiously. • Mr Massey said that it had been Said that he had been pushed into convening Parliament/ but that was not the case. He had followed the usual course consistent with British and New Zealand precedents and what he had done was in accord with the Constitutional custom. The purpose of tho Session ..was to ascertain whether the Government had a majority, but lie did not think it necessary to express any opinion on that. The vision would answer, the question. However, supposing Mr Wilford won the division, what sort of a position would he be in ? Where 'would he get a majority to support him and help him to carry legislation in the interests of the country? Labour members: “From the Reformers.”

A voice: “What happened in 1911?” Another member: “He may get some 'rats.’ ” Mr Massey 'said that Mr Wilford would have (o get his support from the revolutionary Socialists. Mr W. A. Veitch' (Wanganui) .followed the Prime Minister and at 11.10 Mr F. Laingsione (Wairnarino) moved the adjournment of the debate and the House rose till to-morrow morning.

During the afternoon it had been hoped that one of the divisions would be reached this evening, but'it is now considered that there' is no chance of this occurring to-morrow night.