CABINET ALL-POWERFUL

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 101, 26 October 1934, Page 8

CABINET ALL-POWERFUL

The first thought that occurs to one on reading the Agriculture (Emergency Powers) Bill is that the Government has studied to some purpose Sir Stafford Cripps's plan for ushering in the Socialist State. Sir Stafford would have Parliament clothe the Government with all power, and would then, for all practical purposes, put Parliament to sleep. His argument is that the legislative body is too unwieldy to move with the speed and agility necessary for the introduction of a new order of society. We anticipate that similar arguments will be used to justify the proposals in the Agriculture Bill; for the purpose of this Bill,*stated in the fewest words, is to empower the Government to do by Order in Council anything and everything that it may hold to be necessary or advisable for the welfare of the primary industries. The authority to make regulations is almost unlimited. It extends to any other purposes for which regulations are contemplated by or may bo required to give effect to this Act. The authority of the Government is, however, limited in time. That is one safeguard. All regulations made must be laid before Parliament when it meets, and will lapse at the end of the session unless expressly validated. But in the meantime, what may happen? We are not impressed with the arguments submitted last night that the dairy industry should have time to consider proposals for reorganisation of* control as exercised by the Dairy Board. The industry has been debating this question long enough, and it was heard fully before the Dairy Commission. But the Bill goes much further than reorganising control of the dairy industry. Tt sets up what may become a dictatorship over all primary industry, and the handling of all primary produce. As an example of what may be done: It is clearly possible to introduce a Paterson Plan by regulations. The imposition of a levy on dairy produce for the local market is expressly authorised. This should not be permitted without Parliament first considering the plan in detail. It is possible even to go further and apply the same principle (under the omnibus regulations clause) to all primary produce. Consumers are to have no representation on the Executive Commission of Agriculture which is to advise the Government. Retail distributors are to have no representation, either on the Commission or on any of the boards. Under such circumstances, is it assured that the interests of producers, distributor's, and consumers will bo fairly balanced?

Tho danger in this method of legislating is not merely one of. creating a precedent, in imposing levies and controlling distribution revolutionary changes may be set in train. The Government will contend, no doubt, that time is too short for the preparation and passage of

a Bill which would acliieve its purpose and yet be safer. We cannot agree. A week or two of stead)' work would sufficie for consideration of a Bill which would give authority for all the action that can be taken in the meantime. The reorganisation of the Dairy Board and the establishment of the Executive Commission of Agriculture cannot be achieved in a week or two. By the time these bodies have been set up, and are in working order, Parliament will be in session again, and able lo grant lhem additional authority if it is found to be necessary. There is much lo be done for which Parliament can now grant specific powers without going so far as the Bill proposes. It would be better and safer to do this than to leave everything at large. As we have pointed out, the Bill goes much beyond any control measure hitherto sanctioned. It touches the business and the interests of many thousands who have no representation whatever on any of the producers' boards. Parliament is. the custodian of those interests, and it cannot lightly delegate its powers.