HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 36, 5 October 1912, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

The House met at 2.30. legislative Council Reform.

Mr Massey moved the motion of which J;e had previously given notice, to the effect that it is desirable that an alteration in the constitution of the Legislative Council shall he effected by the present Parliament; that the alteration be from appointment by the Governor to election by a direct vote at the polls of electors qualified to vote at the general election for members of the House; that the election be upon the proportional system, and, therefore, by large electoral divisions ; that the number of elected members, other than Maoris, be 40, of whom 20 shall be elected at each general election for the House of llepresentatives, every member to sit for two Parliaments ; that an electoral division for the Council shall be made coterrainious with the aggregate of a number of existing electorates for the House, and that provision be made for preserving to the House the exclusive control of all matters of finance, and also for cases where the Council and the House ultimately fail to arrive at any agreement on any proposed legislation. He stated that Sir Geo. Grey had always advocated an elective Upper House. This was one of the planks of their platform on which they won tho elections. He believed that the reform would be brought about by them. Ho pointed out that a large number of members of the Council had voted for the Bill introduced there, which showed that they affirmed the principle. His resolutions did not alter the present franchise. Some of tho countrj’s wisest and ablest men had expressed the opinion that tho Council should bo elective. The system which obtained now was absolutely wrong, from the point of view of Parliament and the people. They could not get good results. They were not wedded to tho principle of each Island being an electorate. He believed that they would have to divide the country into four electorates, returning -10 members. They heard a lot of the proportional system being complicated. It was nothing of the sort. It was more simple than the present system, and if put into operation he was convinced that there would lie fewer informal votes than

at present. Tho system would do away with parish pump politics and professional politicians. He hoped when the time came, that some of the present members of the Council would bo candidates and be elected. Provision would be made for the election of two Maori members. The Council would not be able to initiate any legislation dealing with finance. If the Council met the House in conference on a matter, and no agreement Was arrived at, the Governor would be asked to grant a dissolution. He believed that in time the system of proportional representation would apply to the Lower House. They had promised reform of the Upper HonsO, and that would he put into effect before next election. He felt sure that the resolutions would be carried by a huge majority of the House. Mr Russell said that the carrying of the resolutions would bring about a huge revolution in the government of the country. He moved, as an amendment, to omit all the words after the word “that,” and to insert the following words in lieu thereof, “In the ' opinion of the House it is desirable that the Government should state its proposals for electoral reform of the House of Representatives (as indicated, on page 15 of the Budget) prior to the discussion of the proposals for the alteration of the constitution of the Council, the two questions being inseparably connected.” He held that the reform of the method of election of the Lower Hons© should precede reform in the Council. The Opposition Party had for years fully recognised the necessity for reform of the Council, but the real question was: Was there a necessity for a second Chamber? Throughout the Dominion there was a large body of opinion against its continuance. Even the Prime Minister regarded the Council as being chiefly a revisory body. Ho contended that if a proportional representation scheme bad been in force during the last election a Liberal-La-bour Government would have been on the Treasury Benches now. If that system were adopted there would bo no need for a second chamber. Tho Prime Minister should say what be would do in the event of the country deciding in favour of proportional representation for both Chambers. Air Sidey said that he would vote for the resolutions as against the present system. The House adjourned at 5.30 and resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr Allen continued, tho debate on Air Massey’s motion re the Council, and Air Russell’s amendment. He contended that while , Air Russell’s amendment I ’was an 1 indirect challenge to a policy measure of the Government it did not challenge the Government’s principle. In his opinion, everyone , who voted for the amendment voted against the proportional representation system for the Upper House. The Prime Alinister had given his word that before this Parliament ended lie ‘ introduce a measure dealing with aii alteration of tho constitution of the Upper House; He did not think the time had arrived for the abolition of the Second Chamber. It was not possible that the Upper House .would surrender any of its privileges without a struggle. It was fighting on the principle of whether the Council was to be nominated or brought into closer touch with the people of the country. He said that the second ballot had to go, and in its place would be put a different measure, the contents of which he was not prepared to put before the House that evening.

Sir J. G. Ward said that he believed that one of the most fatal mistakes the House was going to make was to have both Houses elective by the people, on the same franchise. Even ii one was elected on large electorates, in a few years the Council would become the dominant House. Large electorates would either play into the hands of the wealthy or into the hands of the party with the best organisation. The man with a bit of money would gel the best results. He thought that the system of election by the Government, as outlined in the Governor’s Speech in February, would give bettei results. Nothing more revolutionary had ever been brought before tin House than the election of the Second Chamber by proportional representation. Logically, there should In only one House under the proportional system.

Mr Fisher quoted figures to show that at the last Victorian Senate election, Labour men swept the whole If scats, showing that the seats wen not won by the wealthy class. As tf the size of electorates, larger one; would eliminate the parish pump ole ment.

Mr Payne said that the only true system of election was to pool al votes and allow each party to be represented by the percentage of sup port it received. Mr Hainan considered that the purposes of democracy would be defeated if another Chamber were so constituted as to be able to block the measure: of the Lower House.

Mr Ha min objected to both House; being elective on the same franchise. Mr Robertson said that if the pen pie had one purely representativi House, on a proportional system there would he no need for a Seconc Chandler.

Mr Robertson, continuing, said tha bis party would support a resolutioi for proportional representation, principle they advocated.

Mr Ell considered that it was : dangerous position to constitute a Sec ond Chamber which would regard itsel as equally powerful with the reprosen tative Chamber.

Mr Atmorc said that ho could not support a law which favoured a rich man to the disadvantage of the pooler class.

Mr Witty contended that it was the Government’s duty to give a lead to the House, instead of asking for the opinion of the House.

Air Veitcb contended that an elective Upper House would not work out satisfactorily. vAn Upper House in accord with the House of Representatives would be a superfluity. He approved of proportional representation, and would do iris best to see it applied to the House. •

After midnight tho Prime Alinister replied. He said that there was scarcely anything to say, as nearly every member of the House bad spoken in favour of the proposed system of election of the Upper House, and the Government was not on a fishing expedition. It had already introduced a Bill in the Legislative Council. The proposals in the resolutions were liberal, progressive and democratic, and those who voted .against them were neither Liberal, progressive nor democratic.

Mr Russell’s amendment was negatived, and Mr Massey’s resolutions were carried, after three clauses had been challenged. The House rose at 12.35 a.m.