Council Leader Supports: Member Opposes Abolition

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23315, 26 July 1950, Page 8

Council Leader Supports: Member Opposes Abolition

(P.A.) WELLINGTON, July 2(1. “The policy of the parly m power as the Government has my lull approval,” said the Leader of the Legislative Council, Mr W. J. Poison, in the Council last night when he referred to the Legislative Council Abolition Bill. He expressed certain reluctance at the step because of the tarnous men who had sat in the Council over the past 90 years, but power, he said,- had been taken from the Council from time to time until the trappings of tradition had gone and the Council had lost its place in the minds of the people as a part of the legislature. "\V!#’t the Government says is ‘put the bill through,’” said Mr. Poison. “When that is done we shall explore every avenue and any worthwhile alternative we shall examine.”

In order to dispose of the Addrcss-in-Reply debate and get on to a discussion of early legislation the Council took a step unusual so early in the session by sitting at night. A strenuous defence for the existence of the second chamber for the purpose of exercising a braking hand on legislation in New Zealand was put up by Mr. J. T. Paul (Wellington). Mr. Paul said that many men in the history of the Council had been of proven ability equal to any in the country. He would not deny that ‘‘some very ordinary people” had sat in the Council. but that was not peculiar to the Council or to any executive body. “Record of Usefulness” “I consider that its work and record of usefulness will compare with any similar organisation in the British Empire.” he said. “The Legislative Council has had its active and its passive periods. One difficulty with the nominative system is that the Council is liable in time to be composed of those imbued with the policy of the Government of the day.” Although Mr. W. F. Massey, a former Prime Minister, had at one time opposed the Council’s existence he had later admitted: “I do not see anything very much wrong with it as it is,” continued Mr. Paul, who denied that the Council had any right or warrant to prevent the passage of legislation for which the Government had a mandate from the people. "There is no question about an organised drive for the abolition of this Council,” said Mr. Paul. “I believe that, if it went to a referendum, there would be no question of what the people would say.” “A thing that meets with my approval is for the Government to introduce legislation earlier in the session than has been done in the past,” said Mr. Paul during the afternoon sitting of the Council.

“As has been said before if the Council does not nave the opportunity to consider legislation in the rush at the end of a session the Council might as well be abolished. “I have otten said that if the people of the country saw Parliament in session during the dying stages they would abolish both Houses.”