THE NATIONAL LIBERAL ASSOCIATION.

Evening Star, Issue 8553, 27 June 1891, Page 4

THE NATIONAL LIBERAL ASSOCIATION.

The National Liberal Association held their first monthly meeting in the Athenaeum Hall last evening. Sir R. Stout, president, occupied the chair, and there were about 160 or 170 persons present, among whom were a sprinkling of ladies. The Chairman said the Association proposed to advocate in New Zealand the doing away with the Legislative Council and substituting for it a revising committee. That proposal was to be the subject of the debate. The question of a Second Chamber had excited a great deal of discussion during the last fifty years. The only place in Europe, however, that had no Second Chamber was the kingdom of Greece, and it seemed to get on well without such a body.—(Applause.) Why should there be a Second Chamber ? It would be contended that the object was t~> get good laws and to get good administration. But so far as good administration was concerned no one could say that a Second Chamber had much influence. Its critical powers were often apparently weak, and its criticisms were not muoh regarded. If they took the history of New Zealand they might say that no resolutions, however just, which had been passed in the Legislative Council had had much weight in influencing the administration of New Zealand.—(Applause.) The same remark applied to other parts of the world where there were two Chambers. In England, for instanoe, it was only very rarely that the criticism of the House of Lords had influenced tbe administration of the State. It was, however, thought that a Second Chamber was necessary in order to prevent unwise laws from being passed. Well, he might say so far as he had any knowledge of a Second Chamber, it had the very opposite effect in New Zealand and in the colonies for this reason: that many measures were passed by the House of Representatives carelessly because it was said "There is another Chamber which will look after them, and we will shunt the responsibility on to them." He now came to the question as to whether a Second Chamber waa necessary ? Was it necessary to prevent undue haste in the passage of laws, or to prevent laws being passed by Parliament before they had been carefully and calmly considered? The practice of stonewalling a Bill was sometimes resorted to in the House of Representatives, and it was frequently objected to; bat the Legislative Council was a huge board of stonewallers, who threw out any Bill they thought obnoxious. In the matter of pre-

venting legislation in New Zealand, it had been an absolute failure. Twice in the history of the polony, when it was proposed to alter our Constitution, the Legislative Cotmoil might have been of some use. These two ocoasions were in 1858 and in 1875. In 1858 it was proposed to alter our Constitution in this way: Instead of having the six provinoes which then existed, it was proposed to allow the provinoes to separate, and to allow people who lived in the outlying part of one province to form a new province. That was a vital change in the constitution of New Zealand, and it was aimed as a blow at the Wellington province, The Bill was introduced when most of the representatives of the Wellington province were not in Parliament, and it passed the Lower House by a majority. It also actually passed the Second Chamber without a division. That was an historical instance of what our Second Chamber did on a most important occasion. The next occasion was in 1875. The proposal then was that our federal system should be abolished. Purely if there was ever an occasion upon which our Legislative Counoil should have prevented hasty legislation it was then; but they passed the Bill, and there were only two members of the Council who recorded their votes against it. The only two occasions, therefore, on which the Legislative Council might have been of service it had utterly failed to stop hasty legislation. What was really wanted was to make the people think. If they did that they would do more for democracy than a dozen Chambers ; but people could only be made to think by the diffusion of education, By education he did not mean the learning of reading and writing and the doing of sums ; but what was wanted was to get every individual elector to think—to oalmly consider every political question, and not be led away with wild excitement on the day of the election, or a week previously. It was suggested that instead of the Legislative Council there should be a revising committee, and hissuggestion was that they should have a Second Chamber such as they had in Norway. Suppose that instead of electing seventy members in tfev? Zealand they elected 100 for three years. Then when Parliament met they elected twenty • five of their number as a revising body. The result would be that the older and more experienced would be selected by their fellows to be the Second Chamber, while seventy-five would be left to do as the Hoiwe of Representatives did now. They would send out their Bills to the twenty-five; and if it was found that the twenty-five of the eeventy-five disagreed, and the Bill was considered an important one, then the whole 100 would meet and argue the matter out, and the vote of the majority would finally settle the question. If we had some Buch scheme as that in New Zealand, we would have a truly democratic Parliament. Mr J. A, Millar moved—"That this Association is of opinion that the time has arrived when the Legislative Council, as at present constituted, Bhould be abolished, and that a revising committee should be substituted in its place."—(Applause.) Mr Rutherford seconded the motion. Mr L. Bekr did not see the necessity for a revising committee. He moved an amendment that all the words after " should be abolished" be omitted from the motion, and the following words added:—"And that the system of the Swiss referendum be adopted." Mr J, Jolly seconded the amendment. Messrs Kitchen, J. Neil, and others addressed the meeting, after which a show of hands was taken, with the result that the amendment was lost, and the motion carried by a small majority.