ANOTHER SKIRMISH

Southland Times, Issue 19346, 11 September 1924, Page 7

ANOTHER SKIRMISH

LEGISLATURE AMENDMENT NEW BILL INDICATED BREEZE IN THE HOUSE. (Our Parliamentary Repo trier.) WELLINGTON, September 10. There was another little skirmish in the Hoiise of Representatives to-day over the Legislature Amendment Bill, the introduction of which the Labour Party has talked out three times, and which the Prime Minister wishes to replace by another measure to be introduced by Governor-General’s message. Labour members tried hard today to find out something of the contents of both Bills, which they fear provide for the same mixture of Proportional Representation and Preferential Voting as did the. Bill of last session. All they could learn from the Prime Minister was that the new Bill did not contain all the clauses of the present Bill, that it would be treated as a Government, but not as a Party measure, and that it would probably be introduced at the beginning of next week. The Prime Minister was prevented from withdrawing the first Bill, but it was placed last on the Order Paper, and he stated that its presence there would not prevent him from introducing the second Bill. When Mr Massey moved that the first Bill be discharged from the Order Paper, Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) asked: Will you give the House an indication of the motive which actuates you in moving? Mr Massey: Yes, certainly, if the House desires it. MORE QUESTIONS. Mr Sullivan: Will you also explain to the House which you are asking it to consent to? Is the new Bill, which you are proposing to introduce, different from this, or is it only another way of bringing in the same Bill? Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland Central): Will the new Bill be a Government measure ? Mr Massey: You mean a Party measure? No; it will not be a Party measure. (There were some chuckles from the Labour benches at this statement.) Mr Fraser (to the Speaker) : Did the Prime Minister give notice of his motion to discharge this Bill from the Order Paper? Does it not require the unanimous consent of the House? The Speaker (Hon. C. E. Statham): It is a matter of procedure and does not require notice of introduction. There is another point. An amendment was moved by the Member for Wellington Central, and that has to be withdrawn before I can allow the Bill to be struck out. A NEW POINT. The Labour members registered surprise and gratification at this point having escaped their notice. Mr Massey: I know the position perfectly. The hon. member was speaking when the House adjourned and he has a right to resume the debate. I know that I have no right to move until he has finished his speech. As far as the amendment is concerned, I have never raised the point whether it is in order, and I do not intend to do so now. However, I am of the opinion that it is not in order because it is not relevant to the title of the Bill, but I will leave that just now. I have moved to save the time of the House, and I ask hon. members to fall in with that. Mr Parry: Do you want the Bill? Mr Massey: If I did not want the Bill I would never have introduced it. It does not matter to me whether it stays on the Order Paper or not. I propose to bring down another Bill. It will have the same, title but is not the same Bill. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? The Leader of the Labour Party (Mr H. E. Holland) : What is the difference? Mr Massey, with a deprecatory gesture, declined to say. Mr Sullivan asked whether the proposals in the two Bills were the same or whether there were any differences. Mr Massey: Certain proposals which are . in this Bill will be omitted from the new | one. I must ask hon. members to possess their souls in patience. j Mr Holland: 1 only asked to save time. ‘ Mr Massey: I am glad that the hon. | gentleman is at least economical of the | time of the House. 1

The Premier added that the name of the new Bill was “the Legislative Amendment Bill No. 2.” The Leader of the Opposition (Mr T. M. Wilford) : Has it been drawn? Mr Massey: It has been drawn but not printed. It is in type. Mr Wilford: Has the Prime Minister read it? Mr Massey: I wish that hon. members would not ask silly questions, considering that I dictated it to a typist; that should take the place of reading it. QUESTION OF INTRODUCTION. Mr Wilford: When do you propose to bring it down? Mr Massey: At the beginning of next week. Mr Wilford suggested that the Bill should simply be dropped and the other Bill brought on. The Speaker interposed, and asked Mr Fraser whether he was willing to withdraw his amendment. Mr Fraser (hesitatingly) : Well, in view of the uncertainty of the position I don’t feel inclined to.— (Laughter.) If the Prime Minister would indicate a few of the leading points in the Bill Mr Massey: The two Bills have the same title. There is nothing to prevent any member from moving that any clause in the present Bill be incorporated in the new Bill. Mr Wilford: Are you going to allow them to ? Mr Massey: No; I am not. The Premier then moved that the Bill be postponed till after the last item of the “leave to introduce Bills” list had been disposed of. This was carried without dissent.