THE LABOUR DEFEAT

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XX, Issue 73, 13 March 1930, Page 7

THE LABOUR DEFEAT

NEWSPAPER COMMENT.

“THE BEGINNING OF THE END.”

(United Press Association—By Cable— Copyright.)

London, March 12. While newspapers feature the Government’s defeat, none demands its resignation . The division generally is accepted, in Mr MacDonald’s words, as relating to an optional provision not making an essential change in the,clause. Nevertheless, there is some criticism after Mr MacDonald’s offer to accept the decision of any vote of censure moved in general terms. The “Daily Telegraph” says; “If this procedure is continued it would man that all the Ministry’s measures arc removed from the category of matters wheron they must stand or fall. More will be heard of this remarkable gloss upon a custom of the constitution,” The “Morning Post” describes the division as a salutary lesson. The “Daily Herald” is editorially silent, but its lobby correspondent admits that the Government’s authority cannot survive many repetitions of last night’s defeat, and adds that he has high authority for saying that the Government regards the blow struck at its prestige as something quite apart from the merits and demerits of the question. “The Opposition tactics will lead straight to a general election, in which the Government believes it can secure a clear majority in the House of Commons.'

The “Daily Telegraph’s” political writer says that members in the lobbies described the defeat 1 as the beginning of the end of the present Government. The Government’s defeat does not deprive the Coal Bill of any essential feature, as the deleted paragraph merely gave permissive powers to the owner's central council to impose a compulsory levy. On the contrary, the Government has always regarded the quota as the heart of the Bill, and if this had been defeated the Bill would have been aban doned.

During an earlier debate, Mr Run ciman, urging that more elasticity was essential if Britain was to win back her export trade, declared that the quota would strike a fatal blow to activity by anchoring trade to long-dated forward contracts.