PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.

Evening Post, Volume LXVIII, Issue 48, 25 August 1904, Page 5

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.

STEONG GOVERNMENT OPPOSITION. THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AGAIN.

The Legislative Council, 'which has already figured in more than one debate this session, was again mado the subject of discussion in the House of Representatives during yesterday evening's sitting. Tho occasion was the consideration fn Committee of Sir W. J. Steward's Reform Bill, which proposes to limit the number of members to 40 (two being Maoris), to cease the further appointment of members by tho Governor, and to enact that the House shall elect future Councillors for seven-yearly terms. The debate very quickly settled dowi» to an effort by the Government to kill tht measure, a. though the divisions oh the various amendments showed dissensions in both parties, and also in the Cabinet, the Minister for Public Works voting in accordance with his expressed opinion that the uni-cameral system Mas the pioper system of legislation. The first amendment came early. At cluuse 3 Mr. Taylor moved to amend the clause (by deletion of the words defining tho numerical strength of the Council; to make it read : '"From and after tlw passing of this Act no further appointments to the Council shall be made by the Governor." He thought it wa* time that the House had an opportunity of saying whether any more appointments should bo made by the Premier. The Colonial Secretary strongly opposedthe amendment. There was no justification for the sweeping change proposed by Mr. Taylor. While he admitted that there might be room for reform, he believed that the country was in favour of the retention of the Upper House. ,As it rule tin. LegolaUvo Council had fallen in with the gi*-xt legislative reforms of recent years, and he believed that ' the chamber had been subjected to a great deal of criticism which it had not deserved. The other branch of the Legislature hud been so progressive in particular matters of public opinion that they had occasioned considerable displeasure from an entirely different standpoint from the members of the Opposition proper. The result of the popular election of the Upper House would be to place there class representatives — principally men of means and prominence, who would prevent the carrying of any legislation. Mr. T Mackenzie urged that there should be eomo basis of qualification for a eeat in the Upper House, as he believed that if the same kind of appointments were made in the future as in the past the country would prefer to see the abolition of tho second chamber. The Leader of the Opposition agreed with the bicameral system of legislation. Tho Logislativo Council was a necessary part of our legislative machinery, but ho was entirely opposed to the present nominative system. If the members of the Legislative Council were elected by the peoplo themselves tuey would get an Upper House that would prove satisfactory to the whole colony. In order to test the feeling of the House on tho question he moved 1 a prior amendment to moke the clause read us follows : "From and after the passing of this Act the Council shall be elected as hereinafter provided." The Minister for Public Works expressed himseif in favour of the uniuamerai system. .An elective chambet would bo a waste of time and money He favoured the principle of a revising committee of, say, twelve members, .elected by the House to go through Bills and point out the necessary amendments thiereiu. Sir W. J. Steward said that to pass measures and then wait while, they wero revised by a committee of experts would mean prolonging the session. Mr. Rutherford supported Mr. Massey's amendment. Mr. Hanan contended that it was in accordance with democratic principles that there shouid be only one chamber. Mr. Ell asked why tho Government did not carry out the promise made in the Speech from the Throne to bring in legislation for the reform of the Upper House. ; Mr. Hall-Jones: You wfil get it presently. Mr. Mossoy: In tho sweet by and bye. Mr. Buddo suggested that Sir William Steward should agree to amend the Bill in the direction' ol abolishing the present nominative system in favour of the elective system. Mr. W. Frasor - preferred an elective Upper House — elected, if possible, direct by the people. Mr. Hogg thought the country could very well do with only one legislative chamber, but the present Council had done very good work, and he could not see his w*y to support the Bill. The Minister for Justice considered that improvement could be effected by continuing the present nominative system on a population basis — that was, by giving to e&ch district representation in the Upper House in proportion to its population. He contended that the present Upper House had exercised its functions as a revising body in an unbiassed manner, and had done good service to the colony. Sir W. J. Steward had no objection to Mr. Massey's amendment, inasmuch as it affirmed the principle that the Legislative Council shouid bo elective. Mr. Flatman opposed both amendments, and thought that the matter was one that should go before the country at the next election. There was not so much agitation in the country regarding the ■ Legislative Council as there was in the House. Sir William Russell repudiated the allegation by Government jnembers that the Legislative Council was a partisan body before the present Government came into power, and he instanced many liberal measures passed by the Council in 1891. The proposal that tlio Upper House should consist of revising barristers was nsclees, inasmuch as the Upper Chamber should not be merely a revising body, but should act as a check on the policy of the Government in,power. Ho considered that though at the moment of their appointments the members of the Legislative Council might be partisans, yet they became impartial, and conscientiously acted as a revising chamber. After two and a-half hours' debate (11 p.m.) Mr. Wilford moved to report progress, but his motion was defeated by 46 votes to 17, the Ministry voting with the majority. Mr. Masaey's amendment was then put and lost by 35 votes to 27. The division-list was as follows : — Ayes : Messrs. Alison, J. Allen, Bollardl Buohanan, Davey, Duthie, W. Fraser, Guinness, Harding, Hardy, Hawkins, Herdman, Herrics, Kirkbride, Lang, Lewis, Mander, Massey, T. Mackenr.ie, Reid, Rhodes, Rutherford, Symes, J. W. Thomson, J. C. Thomson, and Vile, and Sir W. R. Russell. Noes: Messrs. E. G. Allen, Bedford, Bennet, Buddo, Carroll, Duncan, £11, Field, Fisher, FUtman, Fowlds, A. L. D. Fraser, Graham, Hall, Hall-Jones, Hogg, Hanan, Houston, Jennings, Kidd, Laureiison, Lawry, M'Gowan, M'Nab, Mills, Parata, Remington, Sidey, Steward^ Tay-

lor, Wilford, Willis, Witty, Wood, and Sir J. G. Ward. Pairs: For, Mr. Barber; against, Mr., E. M. Smith. The Leader of the Opposition asked ■whether, having decided that the Council should not bo elective, the House wa» competent to go pn with the Bill. The Chairman ruled that the House was competent to do so. Mr. Taylor said that tho only way in which members could now express their dissatisfaction with the Council ac at present constituted was to vote foy his amendment. Mr. Taylor's amendment was lost by <&Q votes to 13, the Hon. W. Hall-Joneu voting with, the minority. Mr. Hanan moved to amend the clause in t*he direction of making the Council an elective body consisting of twelv* members. The Minister for Public Works supported the amendment, which was op« posed by the Colonial Secretary, who regretted having to differ from his colleague. He pointed out that if tlie motion were carried it 'would amount to m declaration that there should be only one chamber. Afber further debate and numerous points of order, Mr. Davey moved to re* port progress at 11.50 p.m., and th« motion was carried by 36 votes to 28, and the Bill was virtually killed for this session.