STATES AND COMMONWEALTH

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1034, 25 January 1911, Page 7

STATES AND COMMONWEALTH

e I ABSORPTION NOT WANTED. Dy Telscrapli—Press Association—Copyright. Sydney, January 24. Mr. W. A. Holman, Attorney-General in the State Ministry, who has returned from New Zealand, lias declared liis position regarding tlio Federal referenda. Mr. Holman states that ho is in. favour of the amendment empowering the Commonwealth to acquiro' monopolies, but, in common .witli somo of his colleagues, ho will urge tho people not to accept the amendment enabling tho Commonwealth gradually to absorb tlie most important State legislative functions. QUEENSLAND HOSTILITY. Sydney, January 24. Mr. Kidston, Premier of Queensland, who is visiting Sydney, states that lie is emphatically hostile to 'tlio referendum proposals- of tlio Federal Government. SIMPLE BUT DRASTIC. - I Tho amendments to the Federal Constitution now proposed, and on which the referenda are to be taken in March, nro simple and drastic. At present the Federal Parliament can legislate concerning trade and commerce "with other countries and among tho States," and concerning the prevention and settlement, of industrial disputes, "extending beyond the limits of any one State." Tljp Ministry asks the electors' to romove these restrictions and to give the Parliament general powers over all matters of trade, commerce, and industry within Australia; it asks also for full powers over all sorts of corporations—at present it has only a vague " control over "foreign corporations and trading and financial corporations within tho Commonwealth—and over "combinations and monopolies in rotation to tho nrodnction, manufacture, or supply of goods or .services." . In the second Bill power,is taken (subject to a referendum) to nationalise industries which tho Parliament may class as monopolies. _ "Tile' Times" correspondent, writing recently from Sydney,'said: "The real excuso for so vastly enlarging Federal jurisdiction is that at present so Me things which need doing (1 ttm taking for tho moment the Labour standpoint) cannot bo done by any one. The States,'for instance, cannot legislate at all for the 'New' Protection,? because the fiscal 'half of that policy is a purely Federal matter. The States cannot do much in tho way of nationalising monopolies, because most of the alleged monopolies operate in several States at. once. On tho other hand, tho Commonwealth has been judicially debarred from touching the New Protection while the Constitution remains unchang-* ed; and it is.very doubtful whether any of tho measures'it proposes to take against monopolies conld .pass the High Court's scrutiny. I explained not long how the Ministry <was .hampered in constructing its land-tax legislation by the Con-, stitutional limitations of tlie Federal power;' it is determined'that its future ■legislation shall not bo so hampered; There has been too miich lnw : -making by sidewind; whatever laws the Parliament makes in future are to bo the unfettered product of tho people's deliberate consent." .