Orders-in-Council.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20564, 4 June 1932, Page 14

Orders-in-Council.

The Prime Ministers defence of legislation by Order-in-Council as practised in New Zealand did not convince the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce at its meeting on Thursday and is not likely to convince anyone. It is quite beside the point for Mr Forbes to say that "if a mass of detail were in- " eluded ■in the Acts, the main issues " would probably receive less con- '' sideration, and the process of legis- " lation would become much more pro- " tracted and cumbersome." What is objected to is the growing practice in New Zealand of bringing down legislation that is obscurely and carelessly worded, and then using Orders-in-Council to repair mistakes and fill in omissions. What is objected to, also, is the fact that by means of a multitude of clauses empowering the issue of Orders-in-Council the executive has accumulated a reservoir of powers which it can and does use with the widest and most varied restrictive effects. The Board of Trade Act alone makes it possible for a Government to set up for a limited time an economic dictatorship without Parliamentary or any other check. It would be some small consolation to think that these autocratic powers were being used by Ministers responsible to Parliament, but everyone knows that frequently this is not the case. What happens too' often is that the Minister gives a hasty and formal approval to draft regulations prepared by permanent officials.