ADDRESS-IN-REPLY

Taranaki Daily News, 17 March 1921, Page 5

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY

debate concluded.. the AMENDMENT DOST. PREMIER ON EMPIRE PROBLEMS. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. The debate on the Address-in-Reply was concluded in the House of Representatives to-night. Mr. L. M. Isitt (Christchurca North) stressed the importance of Imperial conferences, and added that he believed New Zealand should be adequately represented at the approaching conference. He maintained that the Liberal Party * was not opposed to Mr. Massey going to London; Mr Wilford’s amendment did not mean that, and any suggestion that it did was hitting below the belt. As to the second part of the amendment he believed it would be better if Parliament could have met at the ordinary time. He held this opinion because we were approaching a crisis and the circumstances to-day were altogether different from any prevyyis occasion. He also regretted that the Premier had seen fit to treat the matter as one of no confidence, because there was a general desire to eliminate the party spirit as much as possible. The session could have been held at the ordinary time, aryl if so, he felt sure the Opposition would not have taken an unfair advantage of any man whom the Premier appointed to lead the House in his absence.

Mr. J. Horn (Wakatipu) was of opinion that in view pf the importance of matters to be dealt with at the Imperial Conference Mir. Massey was the man who should represent New Zealand in London. He considered Parliament should have been prorogued at tile usual time. There were several members of the Executive quite capable of carrying on the business of the country. He objected to a member of the Legislative Council occupying the position of actingPrime Minister during Mr. Massey’s absence. “STAND BEFORE KINGS.” Dr. H. T. Thacker (Christchurch East) thought Mr. Massey should represent New Zealand at the Imperial Conference, but he (Dr. Thacker) protested against the acting-Prime Minister not being a member of the lower House. It was a slur on his party that the Premier should suggest none of his* colleagues in that House fit to fill his place while he was absent, that, in fact, he could not trust his followers. He suggested that the Hon. D. H. Guthrie should be acting-Preffiier and he should lead the House in an ordinary session. The Hori. A. T. Ngata (Eastern •Maori) approved the Premier going to the Imperial Conference. Mr. R. McCallum (Wairau) said the debate was merely beating the air, because they all new the Premier had a majority behind him who would send him to London whether the rest of the House would or not. The Premier all his life had been a diligent man, and as the good Book said: “Seest thou a

man diligent in business and he shall stand before Kings; he shall not stand before mean men.” The Premier was

anxious to go to London to stand before Kings and that was a very natural desire which no one should seek- to prevent. At the same time he did not approve of Sir Francis Bell becoming the leader of the party. It would be better that Mr. Guthrie should occupy that position, as he was more closely in touch with the feeling of the country. In view, however, of the grave condition of affaire arising in the Dominion he suggested that the Premier should not go to London, but that Sir Joseph sliopld be asked\t‘o represent the Dominion at the Imperial Conference. He accused the Premier of putting party interests before the interests of the country, and him on this occasion to rise above party interests and adopt his suggestion. MR. MASSEY REPLIES. Mr. Massey gave an emphatic denial to the last' speaker’s statement. He was not in the habit of putting party interests before the interests of the coun- - try; with him the country had always come first. As to the appointment of Sir Francis Bell as acting-Prime Minister he quoted precedents in support of such a step, which he declared was both constitutional and right. Mr. Guthrie would lead the House in his absence, because it was his intention to ask his colleagues to call the House together as soon as he left England.

Turning to Dr. Thacker, the Premier challenged him to produce evidence in support of his statements that friends of the Government had been favored in buying lands for soldier settlements. The Government’s hands were clean and there was nothing improper about any single one of these transactions. Each estate, had been carefully valued by competent men. In two cases, he believed, too much had been paid—Erina in Marlborough and Tiraumea in Wairarapa—but where mistakes were made the country would have to put up with it. At the same time he deprecated

these constant allegations against soldier settlements, because it was calculated to discourage soldier settlers, whose magnificent spirit he could not help but admire. In Canterbury the position of soldier settlers was most satisfactory, for there was only one per cent rent outstanding. In other parts of the Dominion the position would

steadily grow better and in years to come we would find that these soldiers would provide us with thousands of steady, well-to-do settlers. In the meantime we should not discourage them, but should hold out the helping hand. THE DOMINION’S STATUS. The Premier said Mr. Malcolm had deprecated the value of. Imperial Conferences, and he was prepared, up to a certain point, - to agree that they were not of much value, but a great change came about during the war, when the Imperial War Cabinet was formed. From that date the Dominions became partners in the Empire and our status was improved. He did not think we could do without party government in local politics, but he deprecated any suggestion of party government in Empire affairs. - For that reason he was against an Imperial Parliament, which he was afraid would attempt to tax the Dominions and bring about the old story of the Boston tea party. Discussing questions demanding attention in London he mentioned wool and the German indemnity, of which it was his duty to get a share if any could was tr®u»lo

not only here but all over the Empire. At present we were living on revenue and he thought it would be a good thing to raise a loan in London of about £5,000,000 for public works. Freights was another question requiring attention, because-that meant so much to our exports, and he beneyed he could do good in that direction. As to the suggestion that Sir Joseph Ward should represent the Dominion at the conference, Mr. McCallum had not quite grasped the position. This was a gathering of Prime Ministers and’ if the Prime Minister could"* not go he could appoint one qf his colleagues to represent him. Mr. McCallum: “You could make Sir Joseph Ward a colleague.” Mr. Massey: “Make him a Minister?” Mr. McCallum: “Yes, make him a Minister.” Mr. Massey: “You can readily understand how that would affect his position at the conference.” On that point, however. u he would have more to say, because he believed the time was coming when an Imperial Executive would be appointed to look after the interests of the Empire. DEFENCE GF THE EMPIRE. At present he considered the greatest question they had to consider was the defence of the Empire. In this our connection with the League of Nations would assist us, but he desired to correct an idea that we belonged to the League as a separate nation aftd would weaken the link with the rest of the Empire, If he thought that he would not favor our staying in it for a single day. He did not think we couki contribute a larger subsidy to the British Navy at present, but he did not think the day of the battleship had passed. Then there was the fiscal question to be discussed. This included Imperial preference, which he favored. The shipsing interests of the Empire must also )e considered, because we must keep British shipping at the highest point bfe efficiency. He concluded by expressing the opinion that no one in the British Empire wanted war, but if Jt came he hoped s it would not Uriel us unprepared. When it, came he was confident that British sailors and soldiers would be equal to any demands upon them. DIVISION LIST. A division for Mr. Wilford's amendment was taken, the amendment being ( defeated by 39 votes to 25. 4 Following is the division list:— . For the amendment (25) —Atmore, Bartram, Edie, Forbes, Fraser, Hanan, Holland, Horn, Howard, Isitt, Jennings, Kellett, McCombs, Masters, Mitchell, Parry, Savage, Seddon, Sidey, S. G. Smith, Statham, Sullivan, Veitch, Wilford, Witty.

Against the amendment (39) —Anderson, Bitchener, Bollard, Brown, Burnett, Coates, Craigie, J. S. Dickson, Field, Glenn, Guthrie, A. Hamilton, J. R. Hamilton, Harris, Hawken, Hockley, Hunter, Jones, Lee, Luke, Lysnar, McLeod, MeNicol, Mander, Massey, Nash, A. K. Newman, Nos worthy, Parr, Pomare, Potter, R. H. Rhodes, T. W. t Rhodes, Stewart, Sykes, Gru, Williams, Wright, Young. Pairs: For the amendment —Ngata, R. W. Smith, Thacker, McCallum. Against —Tau Henare, E. Newman, Campbell, Berries.