FUTILE OBSTRUCTION

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21421, 20 February 1933, Page 8

FUTILE OBSTRUCTION

If the Labour Party really wished to improve the Sales Tax Bill, it took an entirely wrong course, and was consequently betrayed into the commission of excesses when its chosen method was countered by the Government. The use of the "stonewall" can only be justified as a dramatic appeal to the country, after all normal ways have been taken in vain to shape legislation in accordance with reasonable public desire. In this instance, distasteful as the measure unquestionably is, the country seems to have made up its mind to accept the inevitable, for the time being, and a use of the forms of the House merely to impede progress lacks justification. Serious and even prolonged discussion, pursued for the purpose of ridding a bill of objectionable features, is unexceptionable and may be praiseworthy. An obstruction that becomes less serious the longer it is maintained, as has been the case in this instance—when flippant arguments for the chairman's leaving the chair have been adduced in place of debate on the clauses of the bill—cannot be condoned. A "stonewall" so conducted creates a mental atmosphere in which reasoning is impossible. It is a violation of the principle, inherent in all good parliamentary practice, that as a rule the measures submitted are capable of improvement by intelligent debate. Indeed, the comment of the chairman on one incident, "You forget you are in Parliament," applies widely to the obstruction and particularly to the outbursts of uncontrolled temper. Responsibility for this rests on the organisers of the merely obstructive tactics, bound to produce more heat than light. A quieter and more useful frame of mind should greet the resumption of committee work on the bill.