DIFFICULT TASK AHEAD

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26792, 8 June 1948, Page 5

DIFFICULT TASK AHEAD

New Zealand Press Association—Copyright. Rec. 10 p.m. LONDON, June 7. The Government certainly does not want a clash between the House of Commons and the House of Lords on a non-political issue such as the abolition of the death penalty, particularly in view of the Government’s own advice to the Commons against suspension, says the parliamentary correspondent of The Times, who adds that the abolitionists in both Houses may at first be opposed to compromise, but in this situation a compromise seems sensible and inevitable. It will not be easy, however, to find the solution, particularly in view of the Home Secretary, Mr Chuter Ede’s anticipation of events by publicly announcing his intention to advise the commutation of all death penalties since the Commons’ vote. The political correspondent of the Daily Telegraph said that Government leaders will try to persuade the Parliamentary Labour Party on Wednesday of the wisdom of compromising with the Lords over abolition of the death penalty. The leaders will find it difficult because the Labour Party is overwhelmingly in favour of the suspension of capital punishment. One argument which the leaders will use is that suspension of capital punishment is losing votes for the Labour Party in the constituencies. The Daily Herald said that although the Bill entailing the abolition of the death penalty has not passed the Lords, the Commons, as the people’s representative, had decided that hanging must stop and the only wise and human course was to act on that decision as Mr Ede had done.

The House of Lords has taken the initiative in political affairs, and the Government and the House of Commons in the next few days will be much concerned with what the peers did in deleting the no-hanging clause in the Criminal Justice Bill, and what the -peers may do with the Parliament Bill, which is proposed to reduce the suspensory veto of the Lords from two years to one. says the parliamentary correspondent of The Times. From the Government’s point of view, there could not have been a more awkward coincidence. Opposition peers in resisting the Parliament Bill argue that their right to hold up controversial legislation until public opinion can be formulated should not be impaired. They can now claim that their action on the no-hanging clause is a classic example of the justifiable use of their powers. This is the tangle which the Government will strive to unravel this week. The solution will not be easy, but an effort will be made to evolve a compromise.