SUMMER TIME

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21640, 4 November 1933, Page 10

SUMMER TIME

PRIVATE BILL BLOCKED

ACTION BY GOVERNMENT INDIGNATION OF MEMBERS PROCEDURE MUCH RESENTED [nY TELEGRAPH —SPECIAL REPORTER] WELLINGTON. Friday A storm of protest was raised in the House of Representatives this afternoon when the Hon. .T. A. Young, Minister of Internal Affairs, on behalf of the Prime Minister, Mr. Forbes, opposed the further progress of the Summer Time Amendment Bill, sponsored by Mr. R. McKeen (Labour — Wellington South). During the second reading of the bill the House had reached a general agreement to accept an extension of the extra half-hour for one month until the last Sunday in April. Mr. Young said the Government had the matter under consideration and it proposed to introduce a bill on the subject. In those circumstances, he was sorry to have to suggest to the member in charge of the bill (Mr. McKeen) that after he had made a statement on the subject he should move to report progress.

This practically meant the abandonment of the measure. ' "Particularly Mean"

Mr. Fraser (Labour—Wellington Central): That is a particularly mean thing to do after the member has got the full consent of the House to the amendment.

Mr. Young: It does not prevent the hon. member from having a discussion in the House just now. Mr. A. S. Richards (Labour— Roskill): It turns the whole thing into a farce.

Mr. McKeen: I am astounded at tho attitude taken up by the Prime Minister. I met the wishes of objectors in the House by extending summer time simply for a full month. The Prime Minister never suggested to me at any time that the Government intended to bring down a measure to meet that position. I do not know whether it is because they do not like a private member getting a thing like that through. Tho only thing I can suggest is that the House get on with the bill. "This is just another unfortunate incident which shows an entire lack of leadership in the House," said Mr. Eraser " —a lack of a proper sense of the dignity of the House. It shows a desire to prevent work being initiated by private members. If the attitude is to be taken up that no private member is to put through a bill, then that is reducing the House to the level of the mediocracy set by the Government. During the period of 15 years in which 1 have been in the House I have not seen anything so indefensible." House Getting Worse

"This attitude only shows what a farce it is allowing private members to introduce bills," said Mr. R. A. Wright (Independent—Wellington (Suburbs). It was not clear now that the measure was going to be brought in this session. The house had degenerated and was gradually getting worse and worse. (Hear, hear.) After all the difficulties raised had been met, the member in charge of the bill was told that it was opposed. "Mr. Chairman, it is because he is a Labour member," exclaimed Mr. Wright. He had seen Governments make many mistakes, but he had never seen such a tactical blunder as this made before. It only showed how utterly incapable the present leaders of the House were.

Mr. M. J- Savage, Leader, of the Opposition, advised Mr. McKeen to give the House an opportunity of voting 011 the bill. "For an exhibition of incapacity to lead anybody or lead anything, this is about the limit," said Mr. Savage. Mr. Young said he took it that the statement of the Prime Minister had been given in good faith and that he had the matter in hand and intended to introduce a bill on the subject. Mr. H. T. Armstrong (Labour — Christehurch East): Too paltry for anything. Mr. Richards: When? Mr. Young: 1 cannot say, because I have not discussed the matter in detail.

Mr. Armstrong: I want to know if private members have any rights in this House at all. Mr. Richards: None. Prime Minister Accused Mr. Armstrong said the Prime Minister was so petty that he did not want any private members, particularly a member of the Labour Party, to get credit for amending this particular law. Mr. Richards said members would have to claim their rights and tell the country of the stupid and disgraceful manner in which the House was being carried 011 by an impossible Prime Minister. '\ he Hon. .T. G. Cobbe, Minister of Defence, denied that the bill had been stopped because it had been brought forward by a Labour member, and said there had been 110 intention of discourtesy to Labour members. He rebuked Mr. Wright for his unrestrained and undignified language. Mr. C. L. Carr (Labour —Timaru) attributed the action of the Prime Minister not so much to rudeness and lack of consideration as to very astute tactics. Through the efforts of a private member he had been able to discover exactly where the House stood 011 this much-debated matter, and then ho jumped iu and said he was going to make it a Government measure. It w as ob\ ious that private members were simply being used as chopping blocks. The Minister of Labour, the Hon. A. Hamilton, said ho thought the House would admit that private members had been given a good run with their bills this session. The Government had been generous enough to give Mr. MeKeen's bill a second reading, when it might very easily have voted against it. Mr. McKeen said it was onlv fair to state that no definite compact had been made with the Prime Minister. He was prepared to accept an assurance that the Government would bring down legislation 011 the subject this session. He therefore agreed to report progress on the bill.