THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1947. RULE BY REGULATION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26626, 24 November 1947, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1947. RULE BY REGULATION

What satisfaction may have been engendered by the announcement that 87 Emergency Regulations are to be abolished is largely cancelled out by the fact that the Emergency Regulations Continuance Bill, by which this step is authorised, also provides for the continuance in force of other regulations for another year or longer. Further, a Supply Regulations Bill was simultaneously introduced to give extended authority over the commercial community for a period of three years. These propeedings have too much the appearance of political tactics to create any feeling of confidence that the Government has at last, recognised that the frequent appeals which have been made for the abolition of the war-time regulations are soundly based. The regulations which are to be done away with are mostly Concerned with routine war-time affairs, but by announcing their removal and ostentatiously removing at the same time some ancient regulations remaining from the 1914-1918 war, the Government can assume a mantle of virtue while ensuring that any regulations which may be useful for extending its grip on the nation are retained.

The abolition of the power to make emergency regulations is announced. This is a fair-seeming px-oposal, but there is no reason why the Government should not divest itself of this authority. It has already proved itself sufficiently adept in overcoming apparent Statutory obstacles in its path. And, as has already been pointed out, many—perhaps most—of the more important regulations are to be retained. Some of these supersede the law as it stands and could be used, if a difficult situation arose, to meet a political and not a national emergency. The Strikes and Lockouts Emergency Regulations are one example of war-time powers which have been used in questionable circumstances. The Defence Emergency Regulations are to be continued until the Government eventually decides to settle on a policy of post-war defence—a matter which it has so far been reluctant to approach. It is not too much to assume that other regulations which remain in force also are to do so because of faults and failures in the Government’s Socialist policy. Mr Fraser’s statement that certain regulations could not be got rid of because of technical difficulties, and that others which he felt should be retained dealt with industrial questions, are too general to allay any doubts that may arise of the 1 Government’s sincerity. It would have been much 'more, satisfactory if a fuller statement had been made to justify the retention of some of the individual powers which are to remain in the hands of the Government.