NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE

Southland Times, 16 October 1942, Page 5

NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE

House Sits Late (P.A.) WELLINGTON, October 15. The debate on the no-confidence motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr S. G. Holland, was continued in the House of Representatives this afternoon and tonight. It was still in progress at midnight. The Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. P. Fraser, moved for urgency for the debate, which was resumed by Mr C. G. E. Harker (Nat., Waipawa), who expressed the opinion that the Ministers who had withdrawn from the Cabinet rather than condone disregard for the law had given greater service to the country than if they had remained. He did not doubt that those in favour ot sacrificing principles to expediency would carry the vote in the House, but he knew that there were a great many people outside the House who were proud to know that there was a body of men who were prepared to make a real sacrifice for the principles ot order, law and justice. Mr A. F. Moncur (Lab., Rotorua), praised the conduct of the miners during the’ period of the strike, and said it would have been a great pity if they had been sent to gaol. The place to settle the strike was at Huntly, where it had been settled. The miners had made a record production of coal last year, and he was sure they would make up the shortage caused by the strike. Sir Alfred Ransom (Nat., Pahiatua), asked why State control was not extended to the mines of the West Coast. What applied to one set of mines applied to others, he said. Sir Alfred Ransom also criticized the Government for withholding the British grant of 15 per cent advance in the price of wool. The debate was being taken away from the subject of the Governments handling of the mines, the Minister of Public Works, the Hon. H. T. Armstrong said. Mr Holland had said that the ringleaders of the strikers should have been imprisoned, but that would not have got the miners back to work. Coal was essential at all times. LABOUR MEMBERS BLAMED. “In my opinion the real blame for the Waikato strike lies with some of the men who occupy foremost positions on the Government benches,” Mr W. S. Goosman (Nat., Waikato) said. These men when younger had been leaders of industrial unrest. They now knew that what they had been taught in their youth was wrong, and if they would come out into the open and renounce what they had been taught they would go a long way towards keeping down strikes. They had sown the seeds of unrest; now they were reaping the harvest. Mr J. A. Lee (Dem. Lab, Grey Lynn), made a plea to the Government to extend the leniency shown to the striking miners to another group of New Zealanders who had been severely punished and who had a legitimate grievance in being allowed to visit their homes only once in four months. Mr Lee said that the country should set its face against all unsocial conduct. He criticized some of the Ministers who had withdrawn. By agreeing to the course of action and then voting no confidence in the Government because that action . had been carried out, they were voting no confidence in themselves. QUESTION FOR HOUSE The Minister of Health, the Hon. A. H. Nordmeyer,- said Mr Holland had moved a resolution and expressed the hope that it would be carried, although he knew that if it were carried Parliament would dissolve and there would be an immediate election. In July ,he had said no one wanted an election. He believed the time would come when the Government would realize that one of the industries that should belong to the people of New Zealand was coal-mining. Mr F. W. Doidge (Nat., Tatiranga): You are letting the cat out of the bag now. Mr Nordmeyer said the fact that there had been so much trouble in the Waikato indicated some deep-seated trouble causing discontent with the management. The Government believed a change in control would resolve that trouble. No one would contend that the action of the strikers was justified, but the question for the House to decide was whether the Government acted wisely or unwisely in the action it took. He contended that there was evidence that the Government’s course was the only possible one. ■

VITAL ISSUE AT STAKE The Rt Hon. J. G. Coates referred to the activities in the Pacific, and said that the struggle of our Allies to hold the ground they had gained might mean the safety and preservation of our people. That was not an exaggeration, but a stem fact that every man and woman must face. He doubted if every member of the House realized that an issue so vital to themselves was at stake now just a few days away by sea and less than a day by air. New Zealand was in that struggle. No effort or sacrifice was too great to defeat the enemy who threatened the country. New Zealanders in the forces were playing their part and had brought lustre to themselves and their country, and everyone in New Zealand was responsible to them to give everything in the direction of welding the country in one direction only—to organize the country to make the best use of the material and man-power left behind. FIRST CONSIDERATION “We cannot afford to make a mistake,” he said, “because a mistake means advantage to the enemy.” The House had in the past declared that the war was the first and only consideration, Mr Coates continued, and that domestic politics must be relegated to the background while the enemy was driving down their way. It was their duty to give effect to that declaration and not to allow petty ideas to blind the issue before them. The issue before the House turned on the question whether the law should be carried out in respect to the Waikato miners. What could anyone do in the circumstances? Coal was vital to the country’s war effort and without the miners coal could not be produced. No one could condone the action of the miners. Their action was wrong. The law should be put aside sparingly, but when people were threatened, in his opinion they were entitled to pass even the direction of the Court. The logical alternative was that 1300 miners must go to gaol for a month and primary and secondaryindustry be paralysed for lack of coal. There was no alternative except to let the men go back to work as quickly as possible because coal was essential to the safety of the people. “NOT SOCIALIZATION” Control of war industry was not socialization, said Mr Coates. He was prepared to work with any man, no matter what his political convictions, so long as they were going in the right direction to knock the enemy out Mr Coates said this was no time for an election, and members would get a close-up view of the reason why in the secret session. They were not entitled to any liberty whatever at the present time. , The Minister of Supply, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan, emphasized the importance of coal in the wai’ effort, and said the Government had no alternative but to get the men back as quickly as possible. Coal had to be had for special purposes —what they were he could not disclose for security reasons—and to have sent the men to prison would have made matters worse. The Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes (Nat.,)

Hurunui) criticized the Government for lack of firmness with lhe coalminers. The Minister of Railways, the Hon. R. Semple, said it was unfair, unkind and not in keeping with the facts to say-the Government was the only Government that had ever shown leniency. There were plenty of precedents for the Government’s action. STATEMENT REPUDIATED Mr W. J. Polson (Nat., Stratford) repudiated the statement that he had deserted his leader or had somersaulted over the Waikato dispute. The National Party was unanimous that there could be no compromise on such an important question as the right of the State to rule. When the question of State control of the mines had been considered by the Cabinet he had been led to believe that there were no obstacles in the way and had “been loth to oppose the action proposed. He had also understood that the ringleaders, who were known to the Government, would be punished. He had thought the matter over and had made inquiries which had led him to go to the Prime Minister the next morning and tell him that there could be no compromise. Mr H. S. S. Kyle (Riccarton) said he was prepared to resign his seat if Mr Holland would resign his so that they could both contest Mr Holland’s seat on the issue. He supported the Government in its action over the strikers in the existing circumstances.