THE NON-DELIBERATIVE HOUSE

Evening Post, Volume XCVI, Issue 138, 7 December 1918, Page 6

THE NON-DELIBERATIVE HOUSE

At a time when the world is resounding with a challenge to centralised authority, Parliaments have particular need to be careful of their reputations, and to prove to the people that the system of Parliamentary representation registers popular convictions sincerely and accurately. Government of the people, by the people, for the people, is a proud boast, but the time has arrived when it should be shown to be something more than a boast. ■ Unfortunately, the past decade of Parliamentary government has done little to reassure the people on this point, and on the whole has steadily undermined the early hopes and promises. From* this failure has sprung various anti-national tendencies, and last of all the Soviet movement, which is in the main a distrust of centralised authority, and an unscientific reliance on decentralised bodies loosely united or precariously co-operative. Illogical as the Soviet idea is, its challengo can by no means .be ignored ; and the case for the existing system, of representation will not be improved by Parliamentary manipulations, legislation by agreement between extreme factions, law-making by exhaustion, and other manifestations of the political "game." .

In many parts of the world thoughtful men who realise the shortcomings of Parliaments are striving to improve the voting method—some by means of large electorates with proportional representation, others by means of small electorates with, the alternative vote, others again by reforms increasing the number of voters (e.g., woman franchise). ■ These efforts to improve the method of selecting members of Parliament are in themselves a confession of the need of change; and side, by side with them are other movements^—the referendum, the initiative, the recall—which in a measure are direct condemnations: of Parliamentary theory and practice. Criticised thus in ita own fegtn&v *»£ sMteflged *9 switf*! csmfesA by the Soviets of Eastern Europe, Aha

Parliamentary principle is in special need of the loyalty of its exemplars. By it* fruits it shall be known; and its best fruits are sagacious Parliamentarians, wise and progressive law-making, and a high standard of political judgment. Now,, can it be said that theae fruits ara being reaped in the frantic session of the New Zealand Parliament now hastening to its close?

We are referring not only to the Licensing Bill—concerning which we have said enough—but to other important measures which have gone through thin and tired Houses. For instance—Repatriation Bill at 1.20 a.m., two Ministers in House, one sleeping, and a bare quorum of members, mostly asleep; but all benV: on proving how well New Zealand's representatives attend to the requirements of the discharged soldier! We are, of course, aware that this is an old story, unfolding nothing new. But. the situation that is growing up round Parliaments, even English-speaking ' ones, is distinctly new, and will not long permit of a continuance of old vicious methods, however fortified they may be by unhallowed tradition.* Unless Parliaments in general—including the New Zealand Parliament—find fresh inspiration, and put themselves in line with, the new thought that is growing up, they will be in considerable danger of being weighed and found wanting. If they wish to play into the hands of destructive decentralisation —exemplified in the Russian Soviets and in the communist movement of some of; the German towns—they cannot do better than adopt the nndignified and undemocratic tactics so abundantly manifested during tie last few days in the legislative halls of this Dominion.