LABOUR PARTY

Wairarapa Times-Age, 13 April 1939, Page 8

LABOUR PARTY

. PERIOD OF CONFERENCE EXTENDED REPORTED DISCUSSION OF LEE LETTER. QUESTION OF LEAKAGES OF INFORMATION. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. Developments at the annual conference of the New Zealand Labour Party in Wellington yesterday occupied delegates practically throughout the morning and afternoon sessions, and it is not now likely that the conference will end before Friday. Previously it was expected to end today. No official statement is available on the questions which thus occupied the conference. It is understood that they arose from alleged leakages of information, first from the conference, and secondly from caucus. There was no mistaking the keen interest taken by delegates in proceedings, and there was practically a full attendance of Cabinet Ministers. It is known that speakers at the close of the discussion late.in'the afternoon included Mr J. A. Lee, who was followed by the Prime Minister, Mr Savage. Steps designed to minimize the chance of further leakages of information concerning conference proceedings are also understood to have been taken. SOUTH ISLAND REPORT. A South Island newspaper yesterday carried the following unofficial report of proceedings at the conference: The now famous political pamphlet known as the “Lee Letter,” the rights of its alleged author, Mr Lee,' M.P., the method of its distribution throughout New Zealand, and the question of disciplinary measures were discussed at length at the Labour Party conference. An Auckland motion criticising Mr Lee.for his publication, which he neither expressly denied nor confirmed, was tabled, and delegates were faced with passing censure on him, or with adopting an amendment by the Minister of Education, Mr Fraser, that the matter be referred to the national executive for action. The debate followed a full explanation by the Minister of Finance, Mr Nash, of the Government’s financial policy which had been attacked in an eleven-page, single-spaced document, widely circulated, and purported to have been written by Mr Lee. Thotigh many duplicate copies of the letter have been in circulation throughout New Zealand, many delegates to the Labour Party conference had either not seen the alleged full production, or only extracts, while a few had only hearsay evidence of the existence of this critical financial essay. _ Before the conference opened it was freely stated that the document wotild be issued among the 600 delegates. No such publication was made, though delegates widely expected that the letter and its portents, and the action of its reputed author, would be brought under searching investigation. POLICY DEFENDED. When Mr Nash made his report he was in effect defending his administration against the charges levelled at him from withih the ranks of the Parliamentary Labour Party. The only new explanation of the Government’s financial policy made by Mr Nash in his statement was that the Government had not introduced exchange control 12 months earlier than it did because at a time when other countries were breaking agreements, New Zealand wanted to uphold its agreements. No mention of what is known as the “Lee Letter” was made by'Mr Nash This was no surprise, because it was understood by some delegates that the national executive cf the party had agreed that no mention cf the document should be made. However, no attempt was made to suppress or side-track a free discussion when Mr J. Purtell, secretary of several trade unions, rhoved that the conference express its condemnation that it was of the opinion that no member of the Parliamentary Labour Party had the right to criticise openly the policy of the Government, or of any Minister, and that no member be allowed to publish such a document without the approval of the caucus. Though not in so many words admZting authorship, the circulation among members of the Parliamentary Labour Party, Mr Lee. in a statement to the conference, claimed the right to communicate with other members of the parliamentary party. He deni that he was responsible for the external circulation of the letter. As an amendment to the motion, Mr Fraser moved that the matter be referred to the national executive for action.