HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 11048, 3 November 1921, Page 6

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

YESTERDAY'S SESSION The House of Representatives fraet at 2.30 p.m. yesterday. / ELECTRICIANS BILL. Sir John Luke (Wellington North), chairman of the Labour Bills Committee, reported that the committee had considered the Electricians’ . Registration Bill, introduced by Mr D, G, Sullivan (Avon), but held that it was an appropriation bill and should not foe allewed to proceed. The committee, however, recommended the Government to intxoduoe legislation in the direction of fhq hill. At the instance of Mr R, McCallum (Wairauj. the second readings of hie Betterment Bill and State Control of Licenses Bill were postponed for a weak. Several measures, including the Gaming Bill were discussed and dealt with. Reports of the debates will be feund under separate headinga, NATIVE LANDS BILL NOT TO PROCEED, In committee on the Native land Amendment Bill, Mr V, H, Reed explained that the fencing clause had been recommended by the Native Affairs Committee for inclusion in a Fencing Bill; and the comnmiee .considered that the other clause regarding rates should foe withdrawn. The committee recommended the bill should not proceed. Progress was accordingly reported. LOCAL ELECTIONS SECOND READING DEBATE, In committee on the Locar Erections anu Tons Amenuxnent Bln, introduce., by -wr V, H, Reeu (nay o', xsianus;, anproviding for absentees voting ny means or special ballot papers, air Jonn Luxe ana otnera complainea that it inignt lean to plural voting. The bill allowed these special papers so be issued to anyone who believed he would be absent at a forthcoming election. Better safeguards were required, Mr Reed said that the Government did not oppose the bill. Penalties were proTided as a safeguard against plural voting. The Hon, W, Downie Stewart aaid that the Government had no objection to the bill, personally, he wag satisfied that there was Jittle or no risk e? i to interfering with Uie secrecy of the ballot. My Wilford awed what a private mem-, her was doing with a bill snch as this. Was it to fill up an idle afternoon? Be had seen the House spend nights and days ever a hill to after the fariq of vet, lug; vet on this bill everyone said, "Let it elide,” Was it because everyone bad such confidence in the statutes Revision Committee, whioh eonsfetpd of lawyers? This was a radical change, and should

not go through without full diaouarlnn. The hon. member was (fill speaking whan the time came tor the diamAonr *^3ter U rßwmption at T. 30. when it was evident Mr Sidey wae stonewalling the MU* moved-to remit progress, thus allowing the‘bill to lapse for the present. This move was greeted with Mughtegteam all parts of the House, serand reading of the the debate on which Is reported elsewhere.