MR M'COMBS'S TACTICS.

Evening Star, Issue 18050, 18 August 1922, Page 4

MR M'COMBS'S TACTICS.

The last session of a Parliament is often spoken of as the electioneering session. No member has so fox made more use of it in this way than Mr M'Combs. He has a positive genius for self-advertisement. He sees possibilities in anything and everything. The old phrase about daemons in stones” has cp been im-

provod on by him that he endeavors to inscribe “ Vote for Al'Cornba ” on any detached boulder in tho political landscape and “Down with Reform ” on tho reverse side. The Electoral Boundary Commissioners altered the boundary between Riccarton and Kaiapoi, transferring part of the former electorate into tho latter. It has, wo think, been plainly shown that there was no ulterior political motive behind this change, as Air M‘Combs alleged; but his charge was made in his own exuberant way, and ho has by his unusual tactics contrived to further waste the .presumably valuable time of Parliament 'on a proved “ wash-out,” and secured another cheap advertisement, partly at the expense of the Government Printing Office. Following Hie present fashion in advanced Labor and Radical circles, Air M‘Combs is a vociferous advocate of the system of Proportional Representation —cumbrous and complicated though it has proved when put to tho trial.° Ho introduced a private member’s Bill to give effect to it, being perfectly within his rights in so doing. Then, apparently mindful of tho fact that his measure might be included in the usual “slaughter of the innocents” later in tho session, he made ingenious, if not very scrupulous, use of an occasional practice by prefacing his Bill with an explanatory memorandum.

Wo said use, hut the proper term should have been abuse. No memorandum we have seen to any Bill resembles this one in point of either length or nature of contents. It is much more controversial than merely explanatory. Tho idea seems to have been to use this medium so as to make certain of getting in a printed speech on the Bill, necessarily involving an attack on the Government, lest the recognised opportunity on the second reading should never materialise. This in itself is a breach of the fairly extended privileges which members of Parliament enjoy. It would never have occurred but for misplaced trust in Air Al‘Combs’s judgment, let us say. The preparation of the memorandum appears to have been an eleventh hour operation. It was not finished 1 in time for either Mr Speaker or tho official Reader of Bills to scrutinise and pass it. . They had to be satisfied with his word that it was quite in order. That word was easily given, but it is not likely to be accepted again. Sir Francis Lang said': “I exceedingly regret that the member for Lyttelton should have so misled both the Reader ’of Bills and myself. In future I shall very carefully scrutinise' every paper the hon. member for Lyttelton asks my permission to circulate.” The particular blot seized on was the dragging in of tho now discredited Kaiapoi allegation, and this Air Speaket held to constitute a prima facie case of breach of privilege for the House to pronounce on, though in our opinion the memorandum as a whole practically constituted a breach of custom, if not of privilege. It may be noticed that the resolution which Mr Alassey moved, and which the House subsequently .passed, was compound in its structure, being so framed as to make tho breach of privilege consist rather in misrepresentation to Air Speaker and the Reader of Bills as to the contents of the memorandum than in the contents themselves. It was a neat way of killing two birds with one stone. And it was Mr M‘Combs himself who seconded (pro forma) this resolution, his explanation—a characteristic one—being that he wanted to be sure of the opportunity of defending himself. That defence is based on a quibble—ho was justified in giving the assurance that the memorandum was all right, because in his opinion it was all right. .Seeing that the Standing Orders requiring official scrutiny were waived for him as a favor, he might have taken outside opinion on matter, since his own was evidently not to bo tolled on. Nor is it still, for, on exposure, ho declares ; “My action has been perfectly honorable and aboveboard.” His standards are not to be made to conform with those of other members, as he informed Parliament: “I don’t care a brass farthing for your decision.” This is brazening it out. Air ArCorobs defies tire institution under cover of whose privileges he is once again not too proud to take shelter, this time from, possible civil action by tho Boundary Commissioners for what Sir William Hemes desqribed as a gross libel.