The Hawera Star. MONDAY, MAY 29, 1933. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

Hawera Star, Volume LII, 29 May 1933, Page 4

The Hawera Star .

MONDAY, MAY 29, 1933. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

Delivered every evening by 6 o'clock in Hawera, Manaia, Kaupokonui, Otakeho, Oeo, Pihama., Opunake, Normanby, Okaiawa, Eltliam, Ngaere, Jtangatoki Kaponga, Awatuna, Te Kiri, Mahoe Lowgarth, Manutahi, Kakaramea. Alton. Hurleyville. Patea. Whenuakura, Waverley, Mokola. Whakamara,. Ohangai. Meremere, Eraser Road and Ararata.

The recent decision made by New South Wales in favour of an elective Upper House has caused some public attention to be drawn to the position existing in New Zealand, though not for similar reasons which actuated the electors of the Australian 1 State in the recent re ferendum. There the privileges of the Legislative Council had been sadly abused by the Lang Government, which, during its hectic career, “packed” the Upper House to ensure support for its own legislation. In New Zealand the Legislative 'Council is more in danger of falling into the discard through inactivity rather than providing the source of a political scandal. During the last few years it. has been heavily depleted in membership. Some years ago it was intimated that the intention was to maintain the membership in the vicinity of 40, but it is now some considerable time since this number was reached. When the Coalition Government was formed in .1931, the Chamber comprised 35 members, but. the policy since then has been not: to appoint new members or make reappointments, and the result has been a steady diminution on account of retirements v*.itil now there are only 21 names remaining on the roll, with pros-'

pect of a further reduction to 19 on June 17. The only exception to what appears to he the rule of not creating new councillors' is the case of the present Leader of the Council, Sir James Parr, former High. Commissioner in London, whose services were availed of to meet a particular position, while the recent reappointment of Sir Francis Bell was an isolated instance, and, nO' doubt, was intended as a special recognition of his valuable work over a long .period of years. If 'the Legislate e Council is .to maintain, the balance that has characterised it in the past, it. is essential that some new blood should be introduced, and this fact has raised' the question in some quarters of whether the time is not. opportune for revising the method of its constitution. It. is now more than- 20 years since legislation was passed in New Zealand providing for an elective second Chamber, a principle, incidentally, which has been adopted throughout Australia and also in South Africa, the most recent instance, of course, being that of New South Wales. There is no reason, of course, to anticipate the misuse of the present machinery in New Zealand, but this, fact alone is nob sufficient to warrant a continuance of a system which is open to objection from other points of view. That the reform proposed in New Zealand has never been adopted—and it only requires a proclamation to make it operative —is doubtless due to the fact .that ‘ successive Governments have, not been entirely satisfied with the provisions of the Act, or have been well satisfied with the existing conditions. Under the statute, the country is divided into four large electorates, which, under the proportional representation system, would return, in the aggregate, 40 members to the Upper House. Whether an election on party lines for the Upper House would bo desirable is very much open, to question and there is a good deal to recommend ■the system' adopted by New South Wales—election by the people’s representatives in the Lower House. From many points of view the present represents an opportune time fo t the Government to consider reform of the Legislative Council, but, unless there arise a public demand in' that direction little is likely to be done about the matter.