Parliament— Opposition’s Upper House Bill Defeated

Greymouth Evening Star, 14 August 1947, Page 10

Parliament— Opposition’s Upper House Bill Defeated

(P.A.) WELLINGTON, August 13. ■■ The, House of Representatives declined this evening to give a second reading-to the bill of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr S. G. Holland) for the abolition of the Legislative Council. The voting was 39 to 37. With the death of Mr A. S. Richards, the Government’s full voting strength in the House is now only 40. Air J. O’Brien is absent ill,, and the Opposition, at full strength, gave him a pair this evening. • • . ■ . The House carried- by the same margin the amendment of the Prime Minister (Mr P. Fraser) asking-for the adoption by New* Zealand of the Statute of .Westminster and for consideration of the abolition of the Upper House by a special committee.

The cost of the Legislative Council could conservatively be estimated at £50,000 a year, and the Council occupied premises sorely needed by other departments of State, said M r W. A. Bodkin (Opposition, Central Otago. , He reminded the House that in 1924’the present Prime Minister, as an Opposition member, moved a reduction in the estimates as an indication that the Legislative Council should be abolished. Dr A. M. Finlay (Government, North Shore) said that without any equivocation he favoured a singlechamber legislature. While he had every sympathy With the Leader of the Opposition in introducing the bill, the Opposition had shown blundering conduct in persisting with its bill after the constitutional difficulties standing in its way had been pointed out to them.

Dr Finlay said that if the Council had very little to do it was because the House of Representatives would not allow it to do more. If the Council attempted to embark on a legislative programme, the Lower House would be the first to object. “Plight of Labour Members" Mr F. W. Doidge (Opposition, Tauranga) said Dr Finlay had revealed the pathetic plight of a Labour member who had made election pledges to support the abolition of the Council but now made a yes-no speech in an attempt to justify his changed position after the whips had cracked. Mr Doidge said 90 per cent, of the members of the Council were members of the Labour Party and were therefore pledged to the abolition of the House in which they sat. The Minister of Labour (Mr A. McLagan) said he spoke as a member of the House of Representatives with experience in the Legislative Council. If by some miracle the Opposition’s bill was passed, and if by some

greater miracle the Opposition became the Government, there would some day be the same kind of Legislative Council which New South Wales had—where it was impossible for the Labour Party to obtain a majority. He asked why the Opposition did not abolish the Upper House when it was the Government. Mr P. Kearins (Government, Waimarino) said he had always stood for a single chamber. The Upper House should have been abolished years ago. He was quite sure the amendment would do the job quicker than the bill would. Mr Kearins said amid Opposition laughter that if the bill were a Government one the Legislative Council would pass it. Free Vote Asked For At this stage, Mr Holland rose and said that as the bill was a private one there was a limited time for its appearance before the House. He challenged the Government to allow the bill to go to. a division and let every member vote according to his conscience.

Mr F. Langstone (Government, Waimarino) said only the elected representatives of the people should deal with the legislation of the country. As long as he could remember the Labour Party had stood for a single chamber, and he considered the Prime Minister’s amendment was the best way to achieve it. When the question was put to a vote the bill was denied a second reading by 39 votes to 37, and Mr Fraser’s amendment was carried by a similar vote.

After the divisions, Mr Holland inquired when the Prime Minister proposed to set up the committee to consider the abolition of the Legislative Council. Mr Fraser replied that there had been no resolution of the House yet to set up such a committee.