The Press THURSDAY, JULY 26, 1934. The Life of Parliament

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21226, 26 July 1934, Page 10

The Press THURSDAY, JULY 26, 1934. The Life of Parliament

The screams of rage with which Labour and independent members have greeted the Government's Electoral Amendment Bill will rouse no sympathetic alarm among levelheaded electors. The speeches that are supposed to have burst from noble bosoms, in defence of democracy and defiance of dictatorship, will take in scarcely anybody. The bill steals away or lessens none of the rights of democracy; it does not bring dictatorship one day nearer or even smile upon it. It does no harm whatever, beyond throwing Mr Lee into hysterics, and it makes possible a more efficient use of Parliament's time, much of which, in a three years' term, is wasted; but if the electors do not want to test the reform, they can reject it at the next general election. The.y can dismiss the Government which proposes it; they can make another, if they wish, out of the wise and vigilant men who have detected the evils of the bill, from constitutional knavery to a smell of beer. The measure will not, in fact, operate at all unless democracy first confirms it; and if democracy preserves its senses with its rights, democracy will not have the smallest difficulty in deciding that legislators need more elbow-room between elections. It is another question whether the Government was right to extend the life of the present Parliament, as it did in the Finance Act, 1932. Or rather, this was a question upon which the Government j sharply divided opinion by deciding j and acting early; yet it could not ■ have waited until this year, say,, without looking as if it were post- j poning the election in fear of its j own safely, rather than in regard for ; the general interest. The Govern- j ment still has work to do; the con-! clitions are such, in uncertainty and i potentiality, as it anticipated when | legislating for an extra year; and it , is a great deal easier to criticise the j Government's decision in gcr al , terms than by reference to the j present situation. But whatever ! criticism can still say rationally on this head, it can say nothing, without becoming foolish, against the introduction of an electoral bill which, simply, ofl'ers democracy a chance of j bettering its own political machin- ] cry. Democracy may accept or re- j ject it; but it will certainly reject and ridicule the warnings of those I politicians who have pretended to ; see the sputtering fuse of a bomb.