Row In House On Late Legislation

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30880, 13 October 1965, Page 1

Row In House On Late Legislation

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, October 12. Unable to deal with the volume of legislation before it at its usual morning meetings, the Parliamentary Statutes Revision Committee today sought sanction to meet during sittings of the House of Representatives. Committee members gained the necessary permission—but only after a fierce fight on the floor of the House which lasted almost an hour.

In a division which the Government won by 40 votes to 31, Parliament gave the committee authority to sit during today’s and subsequent sittings of the House to deal with the News Media Ownership, the Statutes Amendment, the Evidence Amendment, the National Library and Companies Amendment Bills.

The committee, which had spent more than three hours this morning holding hearings, met briefly late in the afternoon and again tonight.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nordmeyer) said the House in the past has properly (seen very jealous of giving any committee the right to sit at the same time. Exceptions were occasionally made where witnesses had come a long way to present evidence, but the plain fact in the case under consideration was that the Government had introduced important legislation late in the session.

The Prime Minister (Mr Hoiyoake) said legislation had been introduced no closer to the end of the session than in most sessions.

With the growing complexity of society, and, therefore, of legislation before Parliament, there might be a case for creating a new “junior” statutes revision committee to relieve the existing body of the less complex legaltechnical measures among those at present customarily referred to it. “No Case Made” Dr. A. M. Finlay (Opp., Waitakere) said it was “incontrovertible” that the News Media Ownership Bill had been introduced late, leaving little time for its examination compared with the long period during which the Government had been considering the draft bill. Rather than establish a further committee to help the Statutes Revision Committee, it might be better to divide the session into two clearly separated segments, allowing committees to study bills during the annual interval. “No committee should be allowed to usurp the business of this House as a whole,” said Dr. Finlay. “There has been no case for urgency made out to justify a great rush with the New’S Media Ownership Bill. “No-one would suffer if the leg; lation were held over until next year. If the Government does think it is a major measure which should be considered at great length, then the recess is the time to do it." Mr A. E. Allen (Govt., Franklin): Stop wasting time. Dr. Finlay: There are about 40 items before us at present on the Order Paper. The state of the Order Paper is such that committee members may be needed in the House at any moment to speak on various bills. The Attorney-General (Mr Hanan) said the urgentlyintroduced and complex Companies Amendment Bill, to rectify omissions in laws covering “own-your-own” flats, had disrupted committee hearings on the News Media Bill. Opposition voices: Well, why not drop the News Media Bill? Work Congested Mr H. G. R. Mason (Opp., New Lynn) said the fact remained' that consideration of the News Media Bill had delayed the hearing of other measures. “The priority and urgency the Government seems to be giving it accounts for the fact that the work of the committee is congested and disrupted.” It was very hard to see the danger overtaking the nation during the recess, but the Government appeared to have

“a curious passionate desire” to get the bill back to the House this session. “This is the indefensible thing in the Government's attitude to the problem.” The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Marshall) said the Opposition was making noises an opposition usually made at this time of the year. Opposition voices: No, no. Mr Marshall: The session is much further advanced than usual. Mr M. Moohan (Opp., Petone): Nonsense. Mr Marshall said the Government had introduced legislation earlier than usual because of the fact that the session was ending earlier this year. In the days of the last Labour Government, legisla-

tion was quite often introduced on the last day of a session. “We’ve got practically all our legislation in and most is well advanced,” said Mr Marshall. Opposition members would have more grounds for complaint if they sat in the House. Opposition voice: He was home every night of the week last session. Mr Marshall: It is not right if they’re not prepared to sit in the House while it is sitting. “Home Each Night” Mr H. L. J. May (Opp., Porirua): The Deputy Prime Minister knows he went home every night at 5.30 last session. Mr R. J. Tizard (Opp., Pakuranga): Why don’t you get out and make way for somebody useful? Mr N. E. Kirk (Opp., Lyttelton) said the Opposition was getting sick and tired of keeping a quorum for the Government. Mr H. Watt (Opp., Onehunga): That includes those going to race meetings, too.

Mr Kirk said witnesses before the committee wanted the News Media Bill dropped. The Opposition, for its part, would be quite happy to see it dropped. “Those still waiting to make submissions want it dropped and it could be dropped but the Government does not seem prepared to have it dropped.” Mr A. E. Allen (Govt., Franklin): How would you like to be dropped? Mr Kirk: Never mind about that. On a weight-for-age basis you’d be out before you started.

Amid uproar on both sides of the House, the Minister of Labour (Mr Shand) cupped his hands to his mouth and

shou‘ed "point of order” to the Speaker (Sir Ronald Algie).

He questioned the relevance of the debate and as murmurings came from Opposition benches, the Speaker conceded he had let Mr Marshall go "a bit far,” but asked members to keep as close as possible to the point at issue. Last-Day Bills “There hasn’t been one year since the Government has been in office when the Appropriation Bill has not been taken under urgency on the last day of the session,” Mr Kirk said. Irked by a question from the Speaker on whether he was being relevant to the subject under discussion Mr Kirk retorted: “The history being raised now is no more irrelevant than that raised by the Deputy Prime Minister In my view this Parliament should be able to sit as long as is necessary to deal with its business.” Mr R. D. Muldoon, Undersecretary for Finance, said the committee during the morning had “got behind on its agenda.” Two witnesses were to have been heard today and one of them found it inconvenient to attend tomorrow. “All I heard from the Leader of Opposition was a lot of childish nonsense,” he said. Mr May said it had been a tradition for members not to refer to the attendance or absence of members in or from the Chamber. "It ill behoves the Deputy Prime Minister to make remarks on that score. “If that is going to be the tactic, I don’t feel bound as a Whip to restrain members of my side from making observations when members opposite are not present.” Opposition voices: Hear, hear. 15 Leave Chamber Mr N. V. Douglas (Opp., Auckland Central) wanted to know why the Companies Amendment Bill had not been on the agenda for consideration by the committee yesterday morning. As far as the agenda was concerned, the News Media Ownership Bill was first on the list, the Statutes Amendment Bill second and then the Evidence Amendment Bill.

“We’ve had a complaint there are not enough members in the House and yet there it is proposed to take away another 12 members. “there is no need for the committee to sit and consider the News Media Bill while the House is sitting.” Amid hoots of laughter from Labour members Mr Douglas claimed that 15 Government members had left the Chamber since Mr Marshall had spoken about members of the Opposition being absent from the House. After the result of the division had been announced Mr G. F. Sim (Govt., Piako) called: The time-wasters.