No justification for all-night sittings

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33965, 4 October 1975, Page 14

No justification for all-night sittings

Eleven months ago the Government postponed the second reading debate of most of the provisions of the Commerce Bill before Parliament. The Minister of Trade and Industry (Mr Freer) said that because of the bill's complexity further discussions with interested parties were desirable. The delay had the support of the Opposition and of the sectors of the business community who will be most affected by the bill's provisions. Those “ further discussions ” should not have taken nearly a year, especially as the bill before the House this week is substantially unchanged from a year ago And if the country has been able to get by for almost a tear without the new Commerce Bill, people are surely entitled to ask why its passage has become a matter of such urgency at the end of the Parliamentary session and on the eve of a General Election.

The Opposition may be blamed for extending debate on the bill throughout Wednesday night, even though the Government succeeded in preventing a clause-by-clause debate. The Opposition would have been neglecting its duty had it not attempted to point out the flaws inherent in what remains an ill-considered piece of legislation — but it could not prevent the Government, with its substantial majority, from pushing the bill through before the end of the session. The Opposition spokesman on trade and industry (Mr L. R. Adams-Schneider) was probably correct when he said people would not have time to see the flaws in the bill’s operation before the election. Nevertheless, the Commerce Bill once it is in operation, should be an important election issue.

Electors ought not to be misled by the sudden determination to legislate against “ unfair traders ” on the part of the Government. However many ' further discussions ” have been held on the bill since November last year, the rush now to pass it into law hardly gives time for adequate public debate on a complicated and far-reaching piece of legislation Rather than subject Parliament to the discomfort of all-night sittings, the Government should have brought the Bill forward earlier in the session Now that it is to hand it should be passed: but that should not suggest that a bill which was first introduced into Parliament in March. 1974, has suddenly become a matter of prime urgency.