The Press FRIDAY, JULY 15, 1904. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 11946, 15 July 1904, Page 4

The Press FRIDAY, JULY 15, 1904. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM.

The fact that the House of Representatives agreed to the second reading of Sir TV. J. Steward's Legislative Council Reform Bill need not be taken as indicating that, it meets the wishes of the majority. The action of tho members must be regarded merely as evidenoo of their d rasa tie-faction with the Premier's method of making appointments to the Upper House. The Bill before them afforded an opportunity, poor as it was, for proving their dissatisfaction. But any measure for re-forming tho constitution of the Council must be introduced by the Government if it is to have a chance of success, and-in jipite of the Premier's assertion during the recesn as to the urgency of dealing with the matter, Ihe Governmeart wem in no hurry to bring in the necessary Bill. Sir William Steward* Bill, briefly summarised, provides for the abolition of appointment to the Council by the Governor, i.e., the Premier, aud limits the number of CouncHlom to forty, including two Maoris, present members not to he disturbed. Any vacancies that may occur are to be filled by jfcsrsons nominated

and elected by the members of tho Lower House, and the successful candidates shall hold their seats for seven years. Councillors who have been members of tho Cc-oneil for not less than ten years may retire at the age of seventy, and must do so at the age of seventy-reven. Tlie debate on 'the Bill showed very clearly tho feeling of the House on the subject Hardly a member who spoke bad | a good word to say for the system of nomination as practised by tho present Government., and some of those who refused to support the Bill were most vigorous in their denunciation of the manner in which the usefulness "of the Council had been lessened by tho Government. It is noteworthy that only a very few members advocated the abolition of the Upper Chamber. The chief ground of complaint against the present system of j appointment—and it is needless to seek any further for a valid reason why reform is so necessary—was that most of the Government's appointees have no proper qualifications for a seat in the Council. [ They have, of course, the one qualification that is demanded by the Government, devotion to the party, and a good many passess the further claim, for such it appears to be, that they have Been rejected by the electors in contests for seats in the Lower House, some of them, indeed, having sustained tlvat painful experience more than once. Beyond, however, the possession of this double qualification, there is no apparent reason why a majority of the recent appointees should ever have (been raised to what was once considered a position of dignity and honour. Mr Carroll, whose defence of the Council seems to have been of a rather damaging character, claimed that the fact that a majority of the members had held positions on local bodies, was a proof that they had the confidence of their fellow colonists. But there are so many local bodies in New Zealand that before long ft will be difficult for the most ordinary man to escape being elected to one/ or more of them, and, in any case, the mental capacity required to grapple with the problems confronting a road board or a school committee is not necessarily such as can properly deal with the matters coming before the revising Chamber of tha Legislature. If the best that can be said for the Government nominees is that most of them have been members of local bodies, tliey are singularly unfortunate in their defenders, since their critics can hardly damn them with fainter praise. Crude as Sir William Steward's Bill is, we believe if ever it became law it might effect an improvement in the personnel of the Council. That need not, however, be discussed, since, as we have said, there is very little probability that it will ever get on to the Statute Book. A much better plan, however, than election by the House, would be to make the Council elective on a broader basis than is the case with the House of Representati\-es, say one Councillor to be elected by every two constituencies. Such a plan would not debar such men as leaders of labour organisations from securing feats in the Council. We agree entirely with tho Minister for Justice that such organisations arc as well fitted to be represented there as any other class of the community. The men who would be kept out of the Council by such a system of election are nonentities such as the Premier occasionally "elevates," men of whom no one ever before heard out of their own immediate circle and district. The system would also compel something like proportionate representation, and one province in tho colony would no longer be able to exercise undue weight, such as is the case now with Westland. Reform, in any case, is absolutely neccssirry if the colony's confidence in the Legislative Council is to be restored, and if it does not come in the shape of Sir W. J. Steward's Bill, the Government will act wisely if it shows some desire to meet tho wishes of the electors.