THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 1913. THE AUSTRALIAN PARTIES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume L, Issue 15390, 27 August 1913, Page 8

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 1913. THE AUSTRALIAN PARTIES.

Th-j: game of politics is being played for all it is worth in the Australian Federal Parliament. A censure motion is now being debated in the Hous6 of Representatives. The division will be an interesting test of the strength of parties, but the motion has a purpose deeper than this: it is a strategical move by the Labour Opposition made in the hope of saving the Senate from being involved in the dissolution which seems inevitable in the near future. In the House of Representatives the Government is dependent on the Speaker's vote; in the , Senate the Opposition has a majority so decided as to make the passage of Government measures through the Second Chamber hopeless and impossible unless it suits the Labour Party's plans, to pass them. The one hope for Mr. Cook and his Government lay in the possibility of the Labour Party preferring a period in opposition to the risk and expense of another election. It is now clear from the censure motion tabled by Mr. Fisher that the Labour Party is not content to remain in opposition;, the power to control legislation in the Senate is not enough; in the hope of securing a majority in the Representative House the party is willing to gamble on the' result of another election iv. the cards can be so shuffled as not to stake the party's majority in the Senate. The Australian Constitution contemplates a double dissolution only in the event of a deadlock resulting from a disagreement between the two Houses. This is the i sort of deadlock which the Labour Party wishes to avoid; it is the sort of deadlock which, if, an election of any kind has to be faced, the Liberal Government will strive with* all its might to bring about.; The censure motion now being de- j bated does not concern the Senate. If the result of the vote is a defeat of the Government and it is made clear that no party in the House could carry on the Governor-Gene-ral might dissolve the House of Re presentatives, but the Constitution does not empower him under such circumstances to dissolve the Senate. The position is so peculiar, so entirely without precedent in British Parliamentary history, that there is nothing for the impartial. politician to take exception to- in the declaration of the Prime Minister published in yesterday's cable news that the Government does not intend to allow the result of the vote on the censure motion, whatever it may be, to affect it. In plain words this means that Mr. Cook will not resign in order to clear the way for an appeal to the electors on terms which give the Opposition everything to gain and nothing to lose and the Government everything to lose and nothing to gain. On such an appeal the Liberal Party would go to the polls already beaten, for even if it won overwhelmingly it would still have to face a hostile Senate and the conduct of public business would ,be as impossible as it is to-day. The party had this experience at the recent general election. In the circumstances it is not surprising that there is a demand for an amendment of the Constitution, and that in the present crisis the whole strength of the Liberal Party is being used to involve tha Senate in the dispute and so bring about an election in which both parties can start with even chances. If the Government Party is to win its point and secure a double dissolution by involving the Senate in the dispute some months must elapse before the appeal can be made to the electors. , The Constitution provides that should the Senate reject or fail to pass a Bill sent up by the House of Representatives, or make amendments which the House will not agree to, the House may return the Bill to the Senate after an interval of three months, and if the Senate persists in refusing to pass it the Governor-General may dissolve both Houses simultaneously. This means a fight of at least three months' duration, and it may easily be much longer. It is not easy for a Government which cannot count on winning a division without the Speaker's vote to pass any Bill ; to pass the same Bill twice in face of the Labour Party's opposition may be still more difficult. Mr. Cook has declared that it is not only difficult but impossible to do business in the present Parliament if the Opposition continues its obstructive tactics, and the Opposition in addition, to obstructing business is refusing to give pairs for the no-confi-dence division. Parliament is in session till Christmas, but the Labour Party can without difficulty make

it impossible for the Government to have "any Bill sent twice to the Senate before the Christmas recess. The ultimate result of the present crisis depends largely on the attitude adopted by the Labour Party after the no-confideuoe division. If they fail in their effort to save the Senate from dissolution they may display less anxiety to consult the electors and more disposition to allow Parliament to proceed with the despatch of public business. They now hold 23 of the 30 seats in the Senate. At the recent election only half the seats in the Senate were vacated. Fifteen Labour Senators elected three years ago retained their seats and, unless a dissolution is forced, have still three years' tenure of office. The seven Liberal and eight Labour Senators eiected in May last would not in the ordinary course of events face, the electors again for six years. It may be, therefore, assumed that the majority of the Senators are as anxious on personal as on party grounds to avoid a double dissolution. But nothing short of this can give the Liberals the opportunity of going to the polls without a crushing handicap and nothing else can enable the electors to exercise a free and unfettered choice between the rival parties.