THE AMENDING BILL

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 50, 27 August 1930, Page 10

THE AMENDING BILL

OPPOSITION IN HOUSE

The proposed alteration in the constitution of the Rules Committee of the Supreme Court, as contained in the Judicature Amendment Bill, met with a dubious reception in the House of Representatives last night. The Bill was passed through all its stages by the Legislative Council, but members of the Lower House were rather shy of altering the .constitution of the committee. The Leader of the Opposition (the Right Hon. J. G. Coates) asked why the alteration was necessary. As far as he knew the present organisation was entirely satisfactory and they did not want, to pass irritating and annoying legislation.

Mr. W. E. Barnard (Labour, Napier) said that the measure was a good one and he welcomed the inclusion of three barristers or solicitors on the committee, though he hoped that the choice of these three members would be limited to barristers.

The Leader of the Labour Party (Mr. H. E. Holland) agreed that the Bill should go to the Statutes Revision Committee; It looked as if the Bill provided for the "job control" principle. (Laughter.)

Mr. G. C. Black (United, Motueka) said he would like to know the source from which the Bill originated.

Mr. E. J. Howard '' (Labour, Christchurch South) said he objected to the Bill being rushed through. The legal profession was taking tremendous powers to itself, and he thought members were entitled to know more about the provisions of the Bill.

Mr. D. Jones (Reform, Mid-Canter-bury) suggested that the Bill should be held over until next session.

Mr. H. O. Dickie (Reform, Patea) said that they had not yet been told what were the shortcomings of the present committee and why it was neoessary to set up a much larger committee. •

Mr. W. P. Endean (Reform, Parnell) pointed out that the rules affected were only procedure rules, and the Judges had the over-riding vote.

Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Labour, Avon) said that he would like the assurance that tho interests of the public and not the legal profession would bo the first consideration.

Mr., W. D. Lysnar (Independent Reform, Gisborne) pointed out that the Bill brought Now Zealand practice in line with English practice.'

In reply, the Minister said that the members of the House who were' barristers were in favour of the Bill. The measure simply provided for n larger committee than there was at the present time.

The Bill was read a second time, and referred to the Statutes Revision Committee.