UNPARLIAMENTARY LEGISLATION.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVI, Issue 201, 26 July 1926, Page 8

UNPARLIAMENTARY LEGISLATION.

Writing editorially on the subjoct of government by Order-in-Council, the Christchurch Press says : ( The growing revolt against tho practice of government by Order-in-Council is of wholesomo significance. It is not the Government which is to blame, but Parliament itself, and this blame must be shared even by those members who niay protest against the practice complained of. A certain amount of authority must be delegated by Parliament to the Government and the Government’s departmental advisers. It has frequently happened that Parliament has been obliged to pass an Act which, for its effective operation, requires the issue of lengthy and elaborate rules that might need revision before Parliament could meet again. By leaving the drafting of these regulations to the Governor-in-Oouncil Parliament leaves open the way to such alterations as experience may prove necessary. There is no good reason, however, why any set of regulations proposed should not be submitted to Parliament as the schedule of the bill. Parliament could still leave the Government with power to make such alterations as might become desirable. There would be very little risk that this residual power would be unwisely used, once it were established that Parliament was responsible for the general framework. The real trouble is that in Act after Act Parliament gives to the Government the power to make any regulations it pleases, subject to ho particular statutory direction. For example, section 26 of the Board of Act, 1919 (which has been wrongfully invoked against the motor buses), concludes yfith the direction that the Governor-General-in-Council may, on the reoommendation of the Board of Trade, make provision “for the regulation and control ot industries in any manner whatever which is deemed necessary.” It is against this delegation of plenary authority, or of amtliority less general, but still complete within usually vaguely defined limits, that protest should be made. The present Government is not more blameworthy than any preceding Government, and neither the present nor any preceding Government is so blameworthy as Parliament itself. The blame of Parliament is double. In tho first place members ought not to delegate to the Government the powers which they, constituting the Parliament, ought themselves to exercise. In the second Elace Parliament ought long since to ave realised what it was doing when, year by year, it increased the number and the functions of Government departments, for in gradually building up the bureaucracy it was building up a large official machine which could not but take in hand the regulation of the Public’s/ affairs. For it is not the overnment that, manufactures, or even inspires, the enormous mass of regulations issued under various Acts. This is the work of the sixty or seventy thousand .officials employed by the State. The manufacture, enforcement and alteration of regulations relating to this, that and everything is, indeed, one of the chief delights and most congenial labours of the departmental officials. If Parliament gives no sign very soon that it recognises the state of public opinion, the chambers of commerce throughout the Dominion should take steps to bring the matter before Parliament and the Government more directly than by merely passing resolutions.