REFORMING THE LORDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19676, 30 June 1927, Page 9

REFORMING THE LORDS.

CONTROVERSY AT HOME. LABOUR'S CENSURE MOTION. PARTY FEELING APPARENT. By Telegraph—Press Association— Copyright. (Received June 29, 5.5 p.m.) A. and N.Z.-Sun. LONDON, June 28. The Parliamentary Labour Party has given notice to move a censure motion in the llousc of Commons. This will express regret that the Government should have brought clown a scheme for the making of fundamental changes in the House of Lords, which the Labour Party contends would "jerrymander" the Constitution. Tho scheme is declared to bo in the interests of tho Conservatives and such as would deprive the House of Commons of the control of finances, Tho motion further says:—"The scheme entrenches tho House of Lords on a hereditary basis more firmly against tho people's will than for centuries. It is in defiance of every modern precedent and robs the electors of power to deal with the House of Lords. -'"Therefore," the motion declares, "it will be an outrage on the Constitution, by forcing proposals without a mandate." If Mr Ramsay Mac Donald is well enough he will move the motion. Otherwise Mr. J. R. Clynes will fire the shot and Mr. Philip Snowden will second the motion. Dissentients in Conservative Party. The dissentients in the Conservative Party, numbering about 70, have tabled an amendment to the censure motion of tho Labour Party which will probably bo debated on July 7. This amendment asks tho Government to relieve tho Speaker of tho responsibility of giving a certificate in regard to money bills, and to amend the Parliament Act accordingly. Further, while agreeing that it is desirable to improve the machinery of the second Chamber, it is the opinion of the movers that no amendment of the powers of the House of Lords is practicable unless and until some foi'm of general agreement has been achieved. At a meeting of the Conservative Council several members of the House of Commons roundly attacked the Government's reform proposals, notably Mr. A. Duff Cooper (Oldham) and Sir A. Shirley Benn (Plymouth). Earl of Oxford's Opposition. The Secretary of State for the Dominions, Mr. L. S. Amery, ridiculed the idea that the House of Lord;? at present is efficient. lie said the proposaJs of the Government did not mean a final solution. There would bo the fullest opportunity for a discussion before legislation was brought down. # A motion supporting the reform scheme was adopted by an overwhelming majority. The Earl of Oxford in a letter to Sir Herbert Samuel said he was unalterably opposed to any attempt to limit the prerogative of the Crown and that of the peerage, which only could be exercised on the advice of Ministers, and the existence of which had at least twice in Britain's history enabled her to escape from revolutionary situations

Lord Oxford said ho also opposed a reimposition of an offensive and dangerous form of fetters upon the fiscal and legislative supremacy ol the representative Chamber which the electorate at the last two general elections had removed.