UPPER HOUSE IN CANBERRA

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26120, 24 May 1950, Page 8

UPPER HOUSE IN CANBERRA

PROBLEM OF LABOUR MAJORITY DELAYING EFFECT ON LEGISLATION (From C. R. MENTIPLAY, Special Correspondent of the N.Z.P.A.) SYDNEY, May 23. The spirited opposition by the Labour majority in the Federal Senate to legislation passed through the House of Representatives by Mr Menzies' Government has caused many Australians to wonder whether the needs of a democratic country would be better : served by the abolition of the Upper ! House. Mr Menzies himself has made no pronouncement as yet upon this, and i it is believed that he is against the I curtailment of the Senate’s powers. | His only amendment in this sphere is i to seek a referendum by which he ! hopes to ensure that, in the event of I a double dissolution, the Senate reI turned by the electors will fairly rep- , resent the will of the people. Most suggestions in the past that the i Upper Houses in the Federal and State Governments should be abolished have come from Labour members, who i maintained at the time that the Upper House was always a force for conservI atism and the maintenance of the sta- * tus quo. In the present Senate. Labour holds the upper hand by 12 votes in a House • of 60. and Labour is making full use | of this fact in the debates on the Gov- | ernment bills concerning bank nationalisation. child endowment, and the I dissolution of the Communist Party. The result is that, although Parliament has been sitting for 12 weeks, not one new word has gone on the Statute Book. The Senate has amended the Child Endowment Bill, and during the last few weeks has conducted a vigorous stonewall on the Bank Bill. The climax of this occurred last Friday when Labour Senators boycotted a Senate meeting, and Liberal and Country Party Senators failed to proI vide the necessary quorum. This con- ' stituted a serious strategic defeat for the Government. A quorum is only 20. and there are 24 Government senators who could have continued with the business, although pairs had been granted in five cases. Actually, only 15 Government senators appeared. The general attitude of the Opposition in the Senate, however, is such that action to bring about a double dissolution and a General Election may begin at anv time. In Australia, such a stand by the Upper House is not as remarkable as it would be in New Zealand. Of Australia’s seven Federal and State Parliaments. six have Upper Houses, the exception being Queensland. All these bodies are, in some measure, elective. Federal senators are elected according fo States, and members of the Legislative Councils of Victoria. Tasmania, Western Australia, and South Australia are voted for according to more or less restrictive franchise. In New South Wales new membership of the Upper House is decided by members of both Houses, voting together—a practice which has recently caused rifts in the State Labour Party. It is this elective, rather than nominative, form which will probably serve i to protect the Australian Upper Houses j I from public disfavour.