AUSTRALIAN UPPER HOUSES.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLI, Issue 227, 25 September 1907, Page 3

AUSTRALIAN UPPER HOUSES.

The Parliaments of both South Australia and Western Australia are in trouble. Lower House is at odds with Upper; and the West Australian Premier has found no expedient save a -dissolution. This, however, has been refused by the Governor, and Parliament has been prorogued for a- fortnight to enable the Ministry to con- ; aider other ways and means of carrying on business. The South Australian Premier "has not got quite so far. He merely threatens to pass legislation adding eight new members to his Council—a step which, while the existing electorate remains, is unlikely to be efficacious. The kernel of both difficulties is the elective qualification of the Councils. A nominee house, if intractable, can be managed by, gentle or forcible sau:sion. In New "South Wales the nomination of new members has more than -once aided Government to carry its point. But the South and West Australian houses are in a degree representative of the people; and the South Australian chamber, in particular, ranks under the Constitution as equal to the Assembly in point of power, with the important exception that the Assembly has supreme control of taxation. The Council elector in South Australia must be twenty-one years oiu; : and must own a freehold of the value ] of £50, or a leasehold of the annual value of £20, or must occupy a dwell-ing-house of £25 annual value. In West Australia a Council elector must be twenty-one' years old; and must .have possessed for one year before registration a freehold worth £100 clear, or must have occupied for twelve months a dwelling valued at £25 annually, or must hold a leasehold worth £25 annually, with eighteen months to run. Or he must have held a leasehold valued at £25 annually for eighteen months before registration, or must hold a lease or license^ from the Crown at an annual rent of £10; or must have his name on the electoral roll of a roads board or municipality in respect of property rated at £25 annually. In both States women share the franchise.

The South Australian Assembly is the most democratic in Australia. In South Australia the Liberal and the Labour party have joined hands, each going a little way to meet the other; and for fourteen years legislation has steadily been carried on for the benefit of the masses. The leaders of the Labour party have been men of unusual discretion. Instead of clamouring for " Socialism in our time," they have associated themselves with moderate men outside their camp, and have preferred practical reform to impracticable. The present Government is a combination of Liberals with Labour. The Council majority represents old-established privilege and the interest of the land-owning class; and the Government has reached the conclusion that, as a preliminary to further work, the Council franchise must be widened. At the beginning of the current session, a Franchise Bill was passed by the Assembly, which has for its decisive provision the reduction of the electoral qualification. A vote for the Council is given to the elector who occupies a house rented at £15 annually, instead of £25 as at present, the effect will be to enfranchise a great number of workers and their wives, with a consequent change in the composition of the Council. In Adelaide and the mining towns the new .electors may be expected to vote ior labour. , In due course the Bill was passed to the Council ; and, to give no excuse for delay, Government ceased sending other measures to the Council for consideration. The Council adjourned tor a fortnight in protest, and meantime an independent committee of enquiry reported that the existing system ot collecting household electors is worthless. The Council rolls have been "stuffed" with little or no precaution ; many names are repeated, some are omitted altogether. The Council then, resuming consideration of the Bill, amended it to provide that the £15 rental qualification should _be varied on the basis of the municipal assessment, books. An occupant of a house municipally valued at £15 a j-ear is to receive a Council vote, but only after strict enquiry. Other amendments were made and the Council asked in addition for a referendum

of its present electors as to whether they agree with the reduction of rental qualification from £25 to £15. The Assembly, by 27 votes to 12. has rejected the amendments as a whole; and the Council, supported by a considerable section of the press, is likely to maintain its position—defying even a dissolution.

In Western Australia the quarrel is about the land tax. Western Australian revenue from the Commonwealth is less than the State raised formerly by £475,000 a year, and although State-controlled revenue is increasing, the Treasurer finds that every year he must provide for a deficiency. He proposes to get it from the land. Last year a Land Tax Assessment Bill was passed by the Assembly and rejected by the Council. This year the same measure has been : re-introduced, again passed, and again rejected; and the Government is desperate. The tax proposed is l|d in the £ on unimproved land value, with a 50 per cent rebate for improved land and 50 per cent extra on absentees' land. The total tax is estimated to realise £60,000 —which does not seem an excessive impost, and will still leave the Treasurer with an estimated deficit of £48,000 to make up on this year's transactions. The land-holding Council is, however, obstinate and solidly entrenched; and the situation is as we have indicated.—Post.