HATS OFF!

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 8 July 1925, Page 7

HATS OFF!

RULE TO BE ENFORCED

PARLIAMENT’S DIGNITY

THE SPEAKER’S RULING. (By Telegraph—Special to Star.) WELLINGTON, July 7. Parliament may not stand very high in the estimation of the average visitor, but he will be forced to make some concession to its prestige in future, Mr Speaker, as chief protector of parliamentary privilege, having directed that hats must come off in the precincts of the House, whether the corridois are draughtly or otherwise. To enforce this rule the parliamentary staff has been reinforced, so that every entrance has its orderly, with, a keen eye for hats. As Parliament observes no eight-hour day, this means an expensive shift system. What is more embarrassing to democratic members is that they are entitled to wear their hats, even in the Chamber, but their constituents, however, will get a sharp reminder if even in the outermost corridor they fail to observe the rule. It is humorously suggested that, as the corridors are beautifully carpeted, the rule might be improved by a change to “hats and boots off.”

The matter was raised in the House to-day by Mr Fraser as one of privilege. ' He understood, he did not know by whose orders, that when visitors come to the House to visit members they were immediately informed, sometimes peremptorily, they must remove their hats. Sometimes, even when a constituent was talking to a member, he was approached and ordered to remove his hat. He understood members of the press were subjected to the same indignity. He submitted, for his own part, and lie spoke for a considerable proportion of members, that the rule should he abrogated. The Prime Minister intimated that he considered the matter to be one entirelv for the Speaker. He considered tho conduct of messengers to be excellent. Mr Fraser: “No objection is taken to that. Tlibre is no charge against the messengers. They carry out their duties as courteously as possible; it is their orders I object to.” Mr Holland objected to the distinction which was made between' a member of Parliament and his constituents. Members could go through the lobby W'th their hats on, and no on© objected. He considered that if the rule was to apply it should apply to everybody. Dissent from some members.

Air Sneaker considered _ that the matter should have been privately discussed with him instead of being b"ought up in the House. It was entirely under his jurisdiction. If mem'hors* valued their privileges and the dignity of the House they should demind the ordinary courtesies from v-'citors. When a visitor went to the House of Commons he was immediately relieved of his stick and coat, and any visitor must remove his hat in' the corridors. Members had privileges which thev ought to jealously guard and the Speaker intended to guard them. There was n very great distinction. in the Speaker’s opinion, between members and strangers, and he was going to insist on the rule being observed. (Applause from many members.')