The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1927. THE LICENSING BILL.

Evening Star, Issue 19709, 9 November 1927, Page 6

The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1927. THE LICENSING BILL.

“Mr work alone.” This is the claim made by tiie Prime Minister for the Licensing Bill he introduced into Parliament yesterday. Pie is really to be congratulated upon it. Mr Forbes asked Mr Coates whether it was a serious piece of legislation or merely a “ kite.” The seriousness with which Sir Coates regards his little Bill is shown by his statement that “ we will stay boro till Christmas, provided wo. can get this thing threshed out and reach some satisfactory solution.” If the leader of the House can keep Iris resolution screwed up to sticking point the often-promised amendment to existing law on the most perennially live question in the land will at length be achieved after several feints. Whether there is the urgency about the matter indicated by the Prime Minister's expressed determination to open up such a big subject at so late a stage in the session and not to end the session until this subject is closed up by the addition of licensing legislation to the Statute Book is a matter of opinion. Under normal circumstances a licensing poll will not take place until towards the end of next year; thus, if the Bill wore deferred until next session, and passed, the next poll would bo taken upon the terms and conditions contained in the new legislation. The only major reason which occurs to us for Mr Coates’s insistence on licensing amendment this session is that ho takes into account the possibility of a general election at an earlier date than the appointed time, and the consequent possibility of the licensing poll being held on the basis of the existing law. Pic knows best.

There is one thing to be said, first of all, in favor of the new Bill as compared with some of its predecessors, whether they' were persevered with or quietly dropped; it is not a product of compromise between the two diametrically opposed sections on the liquor question. It is not a measure on which all the debate lias taken place previously behind closed doors outside of Parliament, over which concession has been given for concession in return (sometimes resulting in foolish or vicious provisions), and which is presented to Parliament with the ultimatum that there must be the minimum of debate and no alteration; otherwise the bargain between the exfu'a-Parliamentary sponsors of the Bill shall ho null and void, and the whole business shall begin again do novo. In this caso the Prime Minister lias recognised the responsibility of the Government and of Parliament. The Bill is of legitimate birth, and is to bo nurtured in the ordinary way in House and Council. Members of Parliament, are to exercise their accustomed privileges in respect of it. This return to constitutional government on a matter of licensing legislation is to be welcomed. Moreover, party ties are not to hold while it is under consideration. Presumably Cabinet has given its approval to the main principles of the Bill, for it must ho noted that, though Mr Coates said it was in no sense a Government measure and had not been before a caucus, it was only in regard to the details of the Bill that he had not consulted his Ministerial colleagues. As to the main principles of the Bill, they are tho elimination of the State Control issue, the institution of the 55 per cent, majority as necessary to carry Prohibition (or Restoration),and tho holding of licensing polls at sixyearly instead of threc-yoarly intervals. State Control, which involves State purchase, lias never been a popular issue. It can be imagined that, even with a Government strongly anti-Prohibitionist, its carrying at the poll would bo devoutly deprecated, involving as it would tho finding of tho tremendous sum necessary to effect State purchase, let alouo the subsequent work and worry of administering a new department of such a size and nature. Neither has Corporate Control, which would have simplified the financial aspect for the Government, ever caught on as a substitute for Slate Control and Purchase.

There are many excellent points about Corporate Control, but from the politician’s point of view it lacks the supremely essential point—i.c., popularity with the voters. So Mr Coates reverts to the old two-issue ballot paper used prior to 1919, with the exception that, to carry National Prohibition, eleven votes instead of twelve in every twenty must be east in favor of it. In thus eliminating the third issue the Prime Minister has only done in advance what the House would have done bad ho proposed to retain the third issue, for the Raglan by-clcetion made 43 suro votes in tho House of Representatives for the two-issuo paper.

Prohibitionists will doubtless ball with delight the voluntary reversion to the two-issuo paper; but with equal certainty they will execrate the proposed reversion to the “ unfair handicap,” even though it lias been reduced. They demand a barc-nmjority poll. Again and again we have given reasons why such a matter should not be decided by a bare majority, and wc do not propose to repeat thorn on this occasion. Mr M'Combs dexterously handled figures to demonstrate tho injustice felt by the New Zealand Alliance two congratulate that body on its new champion) over tho 55-45 ratio. We invite our readers to consider other figures, whic'i in our opinion' ought to fill the Alliance with thankfulness to Mr Coat"- for having practically given them the victory in advance at the 1923 poll. At the 1025 poll the votes for Continuance constituted 44.3 per cent., those for State Control 8.3 per cent., and those for Prohibition 47.3 per cent, of the total east. It has been tho Prohibitionists’ insistent claim that the votes cast for State Control should count for instead of against Prohibition; and that, if there were no State Control issue, those votes would have been cast for Prohibition. This latter, in pmticular. has been fiercely pressed on ourselves whenever we ventured to dissent. But if we were wrong and the Prohibitionists were right on this matter, then (assuming public opinion not to have changed on- the liquor question between 1925 and 1.928) Prohibition should poll 55.fi per cent, of the votes next year and Continuance 44.3 per cent. That is, Prohibition would ho just carried at last. We cannot speculate one way or another on how public opinion may have veered in the interval, hut wc do maintain that the proper destination of the State Control votes being on tho Prohibition side rather than the Continuance side is a most absurd contention, and will be proved so if the next poll is on the two-issue. 55-45 basis. But if tho Prohibitionists arc sincere in their claim on tho middle issue vote, they ought, as wo have said, to hail Mr Coates as their deliverer, and to support wholeheartedly his proposals for the basis for tho next poll, and also for the lengthening of the interval to tho people’s next opportunity to reverse the j 928 result. Per the Prohibitionist vaunt that Prohibition, once carried, will never again be upset by a vote has far loss confidence behind it since the miirmurings in tho United Slates for the repeal or modification of the Volstead Act.