THE HOUSE OF LORDS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22258, 10 May 1934, Page 9

THE HOUSE OF LORDS

BILL FOR REFORM SECOND READING MOVED. LONDON, May 9. (Received May 9, at 8 p.m.) In the House of Lords, before a large attendance, many peeresses being in the gallery, the Marquess of Salisbury moved the second reading of the House of Lords Reform Bill. Lord Redesdale moved the rejection of the Bill., He said such an important, constitutional measure should be a Government and not a private Bill. Lord Snell said the Marquess of Salisbury was seeking statutory authority to make Toryism safe for eternity and prevent the will of the people from prevailing. , Lord Reading said the Bill was a most dangerous attempt to amend Parliament Act 21, and would not result in strengthening but in abolition of the House.

Lord Hailsham said constitutional reform had not formed part of the crisis which brought the National Government into being, and was not discussed at the last election. A reform of such magnitude should be introduced by the Government. It was decided that Ministers ‘will not take part in the division tomorrow.

In introducing the measure the Marquess of Salisbury stated that members of both House had formed a small committee to submit proposals that would secure Britain against any sudden subversive changes, and the Bill was based on those proposals. Ho called attention to affairs abroad, where the old order was superseded by dictatorships and disruptive changes. He argued that in Britain also they must insure against possibilities of subversive attempts to set up two methods of Government. The duty of the House of Lords was to make such changes in its constitution as would make the country safe, and in doing so they should go no further than was absolutely necessary. The aim of the Bill was to give the House of Lords sufficient power to prevent the country from being hurried into vast changes‘without time being given to consider them.