UPPER HOUSE.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20621, 10 August 1932, Page 10

UPPER HOUSE.

REFORM IN NEW SOUTH WALES. A DIFFICULT PROBLEM. (raox otm ows coßßEsrosDEjrr.) SYDNEY, August 4. One of tho most pressing problems awaiting the New South Wales Government, and at the same time one of the most difficult, is • the reform of the Legislative Council, which was the one obstacle that prevented Mr J. T. Lang from enacting some of his most extreme legislation. Had it not been for the split in the Labour ranks Mr Lang, by finding seats for his supporters, would have been able to do as he liked, and in order to make such a state of affairs impossible in the future the Stevens Government has made up its mind to reform the Upper House. Upper House reform is a matter on which the Government is in disagreement with many of its supporters. It has a clear mandate from the electors to do something, but what that something should be has never been clearly defined. The main difficulty will come when an attempt is made to get the Reform Bill through the Council itself. The scheme so far propounded provides for an elective chamber of 45 members, with, possibly, 15 nominees. The Bill will be very much on the lines of that proposed by the last Nationalist Government under Mr Bavin, and that being so there are many Nationalists in the Upper House who will be prepared to oppose many of its provisions. In addition, the Government will have to face the opposition of both sections of the Labour Party, for the straightout abolition of the Upper House is one of the main planks on all Labour platforms. It is admitted that most of the existing councillors have everything to lose and nothing to gain by any change in the system, so they are not likely to look enthusiastically upon any proposals, however virtuous they may be. Few of the rank and file of the councillors would have a hope of being eleoted on their merits if they went to the country—many on both sides are only in the Upper House because they have been rejected by the electors when they stood for the Lower House. They would not be assured, even, of Party nomination in the event of an election. The scheme so far as it has been, revealed seems to contain many weaknesses. There will be bitter objections on all sides to the nominee proposal, provided it is persisted in. Some will call it undemocratic, and others are already recalling what Mr Lang did under the nominee system. That principle may be abandoned, in which case it would be difficult for any future Labour administration to revive it. If it is to be a purely elective chamber it would be only a reflection of the Assembly, and the case of the Federal Senate is being recalled by opponents of the Bill, both United Australia Party and Labour Party. In any case, a referendum is essential before anything can be done, and the longer that vote is delayed, the less will be the chance of a favourably vote.