ENDURANCE TEST.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 70, 24 March 1931, Page 9

ENDURANCE TEST.

"SHIFT BASIS ADOPTED.

LABOUR'S BITTER FIGHT.

AMENDMENT POSSIBILITIES.

(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.)

WELLINGTON, Monday.

When there is a fairly strong minority in the House of Representatives, quite unable to prevent the passing of a measure, it is still able to make itself formidable by the time; wasting process known as the stonewall. This week, Parliament is the scene of a very determined effort of this kind, owing to the bitter objection of the Labour party to almost every clause in the Finance' Bill, designed to bring about a reduction of salaries and wages.

Divisions on the hard-fought earlier stages of the measure siiow that its opponents are over a score in number, which would be regarded by legislative old hands as quite adequate to sustain, by the "shift" system, a continuous obstruction.

Tlip battle takes place in committee of the whole House. Mr. Speaker having left the chair, the proceedings are in charge <9i the Chairman of Committees. The first motion required is the adoption of the short title of the bill, and this enables a discussion of a general character to take place in connection with the policy involved. Later, ■when the clauses are reached, there is a strict limitation to the subject-matter of the particular clause, a difficult hurdle for the speechmaker, who must satisfy a vigilant chairman that all he says is relevant. The Time Limits. New Standing Orders adopted by the present Parliament have reduced the stonewalling facilities, because the time limit for speeches in committee, formerly four "turns" of ten minutes each on any one subject, is now half that amount. In discussing the short title of the bill, however, each member may speak four times for ten minutes each, a total of 40 minutes, which multiplied by the number interested in keeping up the talk, makes an impressive amount.

The Labour party, at full debating strength, could maintain discussion for 13 hours on the title, and for half that time on any clause. But this does not fry any means exhaust the possibilities, for It is possible to move an unlimited number of amendments, and if there is need for a change of subject, someone can be found to move "that the chairman leave the chair," or that progress be reported. A division, hopeless from the start, is also useful, as it occupies at least ten minutes, though this expedient is rarely used, for it nieana disturbing some of the speakers who are away at lest.

. The; House cannot function unless twenty members are present. To maintain this quorum is the responsibility of the Government, so that the stonewallers always have-an audience that is sleeping more or less silently., . , Mr. Massey's Methods. ' . A*stonewall resolves itself into a trial of-.physical, endurance, and in its final stages, when the Chairman of Committees commences to rule out arguments which have been tediously repeated, a battle of wits between tired speakers and the chair. The most effective stonewall strategy was initiated by the late Mi\ Massey, when, during the 1909 session he moved a £39!) reduction in a £400 vote, and proceeded to submit further amendments, £1 at a time, with the prospect of forcing tho House into 399 divisions before this system could be exhausted. The tussle commenced on a Friday, and was continued except for Sunday and meal adjournments; until 8 a.m. on the following Wednesday, when the Ward Government made a concession sufficiently adequate to satisfy the Opposition. There was a 48-hour stonewall in the 1924 session, over an amendment of the Gaming Act. This came to a sudden end over a dispute with the Chairman of Committees, who was accused of overlooking a member's call for a division. The, stonewallers left in- a body as a protest, and the remaining members then made short "work, of the . eomuiil«£ee stage of the measure. Bill's Passage Apparently Certain. In more recent years, these long proi tests of the minority have ndt been so spectacular, and -the new Standing Orders have imposed further restrictions which cut down the time-wasting opportunities. However, the situation is full of .'-interest when a minority Government has to face the hazards or innumerable amendments, some of which may.appeal to a sufficient section of the Opposition to cause serious disturbance of its.plans. The Prime Minister, too, has already niade it plain that... the 10. per cent reduction in Public Servants' salaries is an essential part of the Government's financial rehabilitation scheme, so that defeat of this clause would mean a political upheaval. There is always the possibility, however, that the cut may be tempered by provision against hardship; and some definite safeguards inrelation to the cost of living. The debate so far has shown that the main principle of the reduction carries the support of a majority" of the House. Stonewalling tactics might' delay the operation of the measure until after its proposed date, : April 1, though the Government could counter, this victory by introducing an additional : clause making it, retrospective rrom that date.