THE PREAMBLE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7392, 21 March 1911, Page 6

THE PREAMBLE

Tho oablq message published yesterday reporting a statement .concerning the Parliament Bill made by, Mr J. R. MacDonald, chairman of the Labour party in ' the British House of Commons, evident-, ly suffered from condensation. It represents Mr MacDonald as saying he "will strenuously oppose the preamble of tho Parliament Bill, creating another -second chamber/* We presume that the Labour leader intended to convoy intimation that he believes ; a second branch of the Legislature unnecessary, and must therefore oppose the preamble to the Parliament Bill. . But the preamble does- not create a second chamber; it merely promises, at some future time not oven approximately specified, to substitute for the present House of Lords a chamber constituted on a popular instead of ’a hereditary basis. This preamble has been the subject of much discussion, for tho Liberal party does not unanimously desire it; indeed it is understood to be the outcome of a compromise in tire Cabinet, under which the Lords* veto was given precedence on condition that the question of reform was retained. Bo that as it may, the preamble is not really vital, and there is a good deal to support the views of those who regard it as a superfluity. Mr Ramsay MacDonald is quite consistent in his'' present attitude. .He has been perfectly candid, in objecting to a second chamber as part of the ' machinery of government, holding that 'They have failed wherever they have been tried/* ami although (so Jar as we are aware) the Labour party has made no official pronouncement on the subject, di; will very likely bo found, when the time comes, urging the adoption of a unicameral system. This, of course, is no part of the Liberal policy or programme, nor do we in any way endorse it in endeavouring to state the Labour attitude. The preamble, in fact, is a distinct declaration that a single-chamber Parliament is not * contemplated, i It thus provides a corrective to Tory criticism of a rather hysterical order, and at the same time assures the nation that there shall be a revising body with ample power to arrest hasty legislation. But the second chamber has got to be subordinate eventually to the House of Commons, and its composition must rely on merit, not. birth. When and how this change shall be brought about depends on circumstances. After the Parliament Bill becomes law—which it assuredly will—and the existing House of Lords is reduced to a more reasonable frame of mind; when the victory of the people at the polls is clinched by their gaining proper legal and constitutional control over the legislative machinery; when the peers are no longer in p, position to effectively resist—then further reform of tho second chamber may be undertaken in a reasonably deliberate manner, dispassionately, and with cer.tainty of success. Meantime there is a happy augury in the growing appetite of the Lords themselves for improvement. It may even be that reform may. come from within. A disposition to throw the hereditary privilege overboard I lias already been indicated, though this can hardly be accepted without some suspicion just yet. But 'the House of Lords ijh at passes the Parliament Bill will by that act alone have passed an appreciable distance through the fire of reform, and its temper will be considerably chastened. Our latest cablegrams this morning give an outline of a fresh scheme prepared by Lords Selborne and Winchester and approved by Conservative leaders. It will be observed that tho desire for conferences and referenda is not yet abandoned, and that only

“■moderate’* reform of the L/ords is included ih tie new proposals. These, of course, will not be acceptable, but they are welcome as showing 1 realisation that the old order must change*. For the present .the Parliament Bill is the thing* %

with or without its preamble. It will free the Commons from a subserviency that was always irritating: and in a very real sense discreditable to a modern Stale.