MORATORIUM DATE.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 235, 3 October 1924, Page 9

MORATORIUM DATE.

THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL INTERFERES. DATE OF FINAL OPERATION. (By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, Thursday. A hostile reception to the amendments made in the Mortgages Final Extension Bill by the Legislative Council shows that a battle royal between the two Houses is commencing. When the amendments were reported to the House of Representatives tonight, the Premier said some were acceptable, notably a new clause enabling applications in respect of mortgages under £1000 to be referred by a judge to a magistrate. He moved, however, that the House disagree with the Council's amendment altering the date of the notice of extension from March 31, 1925, to December 31, 1924, and limiting the rights of mortgagees to December 31, 1924, when the House had decided that there could be no interference till July 31, 1925. Mr. Wilford agreed with the Premier's motion, declaring that on four occasions by its own vote the House had decided on July as the date, but the Council had altered the bill back to what was the Government's original opinion. It yvas a peculiar position that all the representatives of the people could do would be to appoint managers to confer wilh the Council's representatives, but if the latter refused to agree with them nothing could be done. Mr. Holland remarked that the issue of the dates had been fought in the House agniiiEt the Government, and he was interested to know if the Government was responsible for the reversion to the original date. Cabinet Ministers voted for the particular date which the Council inserted and the bill came back to the House in the shape for which the Government had fought. Mr. W. D. Lysnar: I regret the Premier did not express his opinion on the Council's action. Mr. Massey: Dont forget Standing Orders prevent it (Laughter). Mr. Lysnar said he also regretted that the Government's representative in the Council agreed with its amendments. Mr. J. A. Young suggested that the bill was so important that it must not be dropped as would be its fate if the House quarrelled with the Upper House and could not secure agreement. Mr. B. Masters referred to the Legislative Council as a party machine, but on a point of order raised by the Premier ho was obli"--! to withdraw the phrase. Anothei . critic of the Council was Mr. M. j. Savage, who considered its action showed how far our alleged self-government went when tested out. "We must have the bill and nothing but the bill we passed," said the Hon. D. Buddo, who demanded that the House stand by its rights. The Hon. C. J. Parr suggested that there was no occasion for heat. He hoped to see a friendly conference with the Council representatives. "A game of ducks and drakes with the representatives of the Government." was the indignant opinion of Mr. W. S. Parry. Although if was obvious the House would_ accept the Premier's motion I the discussion was prolonged, and the reason was no secret. When a Labour member remarked incidentally that be regretted tho prolongation" of fho I debate, the Premier interjected: "It's the next bill." The Premier was referring fo the Gaming Amendment Bill, next on the Order Paper. It could not be taken unless it was reached by 12.30 a.m.