The Northern Advocate Daily “NORTHLAND FIRST” SATURDAY, JUNE 3, 1939. The 1939 Session

Northern Advocate, 3 June 1939, Page 6

The Northern Advocate Daily “NORTHLAND FIRST”

SATURDAY, JUNE 3, 1939. The 1939 Session

1 Registered for transmission through the post as a Newspaper

MANY people in New Zealand will perhaps be relieved to learn, on the authority of Mr Savage, in a statement made at Christchurch yesterday, that no major legislation—or very little —is contemplated by the Government in the comingsession. Mr Savage's view of what constitutes “major legislation," however, may differ materially from that of many people affected by it. Much depends upon individual circumstances. Last December the Government would have liked the country to believe that import control was merely a minor adjustment of trade, but to thousands of importers and businessmen it was a catastrophe. In the same way, legislation which Mr Savage dismisses as trivial, may be regarded by many people as highly important, both in abstract principle, and on its bearing on the national and individual welfare. It does seem likely, nevertheless, that the Government will call at least a temporary halt in measures of a drastic Socialistic nature which might seriously affect _ the economic stability of the country. This is no time to take risks, a point which Mr Savage and Mr Nash no doubt appreciate as much as anyone. Apparently some legislation on the question of paid holidays for all is on the stocks, but as yet it appears to be fairly nebulous, and there is no certainty that it may come up this session.

There has also been talk of legislation dealing with the hirepurchase system. There are evils connected, with which undoubtedly should be eradicated, but they are not practised by the more reputable firms, and the Government will have to remember that hire-purchase, whatever its drawbacks, has conferred on thousands of people the opportunity to purchase things which otherwise they would never have owned. It appears to have become an integral part of modern business practice, and those who, as a class, have cheerfully supported it, have been the Government's own supporters. Thus the Government will have to move circumspectly in approaching this question. Discussing the formal debates, Mr Savage said yesterday that the length of the Address-in-Reply Debate depends upon the Opposition. That is hardly a fair statement, for it is the legitimate, constitutional prerogative of the Opposition to challenge Government policy to the fullest extent on these occasions. The Labour Party, when in Opposition, never waived its right to exhaust its full battery of speakers in these debates, and there is no reason why it should expect others to do so now.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the session will be the Budget Debate after the return of Mr Nash. For the rest, it will be largely a settling-in period for many of the new members. The National Party has some new members who should liven up the debates considerably. But no matter how keen the exchanges in the House, it is certain that they will be ably presided over by the Hon. W. E. Barnard, whose reappointment as Speaker is well deserved. Mr A. S. Richards, as Chairman of Committees, should prove equally worthy of his position.