A ROUGH PASSAGE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 743, 16 August 1929, Page 10

A ROUGH PASSAGE

HOUSE IS WARNED MR. MUNNS’S BUDGET SPEECH The SIX'S Parliamentary Reporter’ WELLING TON. Thursday. For the opening portion of his Financial Debate speech, the member for Roskill, Mr. G. C. Munns, had rather a bad passage from interjectors in the House of Representatives this afternoon. Mr. Speaker had to warn members twice not to interrupt. Mr. Munns made a defence of the Government’s policy, and claimed that it was doing all possible to fulfil its election promises. He start ed off by saying that he tv as surprised to hear the argument raised that the Reform and United Parties were one and the same party, and that their differences in the House were in the nature of a sham political battle. He thought that the fact that the parties were so diametrically opposed in their politics showed that it was a real political fight and not a sham battle. Mr. E. J Howard (Christchurch South): Pure sham! Mr. Munns was further interrupted, and then he went on to speak of the difference in the land policy of the two parties; the Government was out to put the people back on the land. A Reform Voice: In the land. Mr. Speaker: Order! Order! There is too much interruption. There were three separate parties in the House, Mr. Munns continued. “Why,” he said, “if I were asked to vote Reform or Labour, and Reform had the same old policy, I would vote with Labour.” (Labour hear, hears, and derision from Reform.) Mr. Speaker called again for order, and Mr. Munns strove to make headway against a stream of interjections. Mr. Speaker: lam sorry tc interrupt members so early in the proceedings, but there is too much persistent interruption. The House quietened down again, and Mr. Munns discussed the ancient Reform boast of searching the pigeonholes. The Government had done that, and had discovered the balloon loop, a certain letter, a road that cost £IO,OOO a mile, and a land deal. A Labour Member: What was the last remark? Mr. Munns: A land deal. Discussing the £70,000,000 loau. Mr. Munns said that he was tired of hearing about it. and that both the Opposition parties had made a stalkinghorse of it.

“We made a stalking-horse of it before the election,” he said. “I grant you that. When we did that w c honestly hoped that we would do what we set out to do.”

He still thought that the Govern ment would carry out those promises. One would think to hear the criticism that the Government had been in office eight or ten years, instead of eight or ten months. The borrowing programme w*as for eight or ten years. During its term in office, the Government had fulfilled its promises so far, he claimed. He admitted that the Government had failed tu raise £70,000,000 at present, but he had confidence that that promise would be carried out. He appealed for a chance to be given to the Government to carry out its policy. If it could not carry out its programme in its entirety, he aske3 where was the Government that had ever done so.