USE OF WIDE POWERS

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 106, 31 October 1936, Page 8

USE OF WIDE POWERS

Our reference on Thursday to the obligation on the community to "resist radical use of emergency powers" led Mr. W. J. Lyon to ask the Attorney-General if he thought the words were "capable of seditious interpretation." • The Attorney-Gen-eral did not support this foolish attempt to stifle legitimate criticism, but replied that if the ivords "emergency powers" meant the unnecessary use of such powers, he could assure the House that there was no intention on the part of the Government to use those powers unnecessarily. If that was the meaning of the words in the article then, of course, the question would become largely academical. The meaning of the words is, we think, clear to anyone who read the whole article and knows anything of the Government's legislation. We have never suggested or countenanced physical resistance to duly-constituted authority, but we do say emphatically that the community should be prepared to resist by all constitutional means extreme use of the very wide powers which the Government has taken upon itself. The Minister of Finance, who sponsored much* of this legislation in the House, declared that some of the wide powers were for use only in an

emergency, and others were to be applied under stipulated conditions. But there are forces in the country and in the Labour Party which do not favour this caution. For example, the Government itself has had lo resist erstwhile supporters who would have it make free use at once of its "costless crediL" powers. There may be others who would like to see the control of foreign exchanges applied to ration all imports. This and much more the Government has power to do without adding to the legislation on the Statute Book, and what assurance have we that, now the legislation is passed, the radical wing of the party will not compel its radical administration? There is no certain assurance, and it is doubly urgent that moderate opinion throughout the country should be so organised that (as we said on Thursday) the Government may be convinced that by forcing the pace it will be hastening its own downfall. And, lest Mr. Lyon should see in this something capable of seditious interpretation, we mean by downfall electoral defeat ,on the first constitutional opportunity.