DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26261, 4 November 1950, Page 7

DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT

Likelihobd In Australia (From C. R. MENTIPLAY, Special Correspondent of the N.Z.PA.) (Rec. 10 p.m.) SYDNEY, Nov. 3. The prospect of a double dissolution of the Australian Parliamentary Houses followed by a General Election now appears more likely than at any time since the height of the controversy over the Communist Party Dissolution Bill. A section of Cabinet is pressing strongly for immediate action to secure a double dissolution so that an election can take place on December 16 after a campaign lasting five weeks. Ministers understood to favour this course are Messrs R. G. Casey (Supply), J. Francis (Army), and T. W. White (Air).

Since the last General Election 11 months ago the Labour majority in the Senate has been a constant source of embarrassment to the Liberal-Country Party Coalition Government. On child endowment payments and on anti-Communist legislation the Upper House held its ground long enough to cause maximum discomfort to the Government. A few weeks ago the Senate finally allowed the passage of the Communist Party Dissolution Bill and Government supporters pro-, claimed a great victory. Observers suggest to-day, however, that this manoeuvre may have actually strengthened Labour’s position as the party was anything but united in its opposition to the Anti-Communist Bill and the issue would have been a doubtful one on which to fight an election. Since then Labour has endeavoured to use its Senate majority to the best effect to gain time while seeking more favourable grounds on which to provoke a double dissolution. The original Commonwealth Bank Bill was introduced into the House of Representatives last March by the Treasurer (Mr Fadden). It repealed the Chifley Government’s Bank Nationalisation Act and provided that the Commonwealth Bank should be controlled by a board instead of by a governor alone. In June, after the bill had passed the Lower House intact. the Labour majority in the Senate deleted the clause providing for the appointment of a board. On the following day the House of Represen tatives reinserted the clause and sent the bill back to the Senate, but before further action could be taken Parliament adjourned until October 4. On resumption, the Senate again deleted the clause, but when the House of Representatives received the bid back the Government placed it last on the notice paper. In the meantime a second Commonwealth Bank Bill identical with the first was gagged through the House ot Representatives. The leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator N O’Sullivan) repeatedly sought to have the second bill discussed, but was consistently defeated by the Labour majority which insisted upon its Prices Referendum Bill being passed first The Prices Bill went through the Senate this week and the Labour leader in the Senate (Senator W. P. Ashley' immediately announced Labour's intention to move that the bank bill should be referred to a select committee for investigation. Cabinet's problem is whether this continued action by the Labour majority in the Senate constitutes "failure to pass” the bill which would provide Mr Menzies with grounds to approach the Governor-General with a demand for a double dissolution.

Labour strategists believe they have won important victories in the last few months and that time is on their side. They have avoided the possibility of a General Election fought on suppression of the Communist Party at a time when the Korean war was uppermost in people’s minds. They have staged a delaying action on the Bank Bill on traditional Labour principles. Most imnortant, they have contrived to introduce as a possible main election issue price control. The Prices Bill, which has just been driven through the Senate by the Labour majority, and which is now before the Lower House, is an attempt to halt the cost of living spiral by placin'! price control in the hands of the Commonwealth. They believe that the longer they wait before the election the greater will be public reaction against rising costs and the better will be Labour’s chances of success.