The Sun SATURDAY, MAY 16, 1914. EVICTING AN EXASPERATING SENATE.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 85, 16 May 1914, Page 8

The Sun SATURDAY, MAY 16, 1914. EVICTING AN EXASPERATING SENATE.

Over in the Federal Parliament the parties are at grips in real earnest The Prime Minister (Mr Joseph Cook) is leading a desperate charge which aims'at tumbling both Houses into the country again—a double dissolution — and the Opposition, led by Mr Andrew Fisher, is just as desperately striving to defeat the scheme. The conditions are almost extraordinary. The Liberals, while they possess a workingmajority in the House of Eepresenta'tives, are in a hopeless minority in the Senate, which is overwhelmingly Labour, and votes accordingly. It follows that Labour impotence in the Lower House is transformed into victory in the revisory Chamber. Hence the deadlock. It leaves the Senate absolute masters of the political situation. Its approval of a measure on its ineiits the Government mayor may not receive; its disapproval has to be suffered by the Ministry, which proceeds to its work hesitant and shackled. Mr Cook, in his political helplessness, seeks a !double dissolution, but the enemy is naturally very Unwilling to risk its present advantage on a throw of the dice, in the shape of an election. The Government has planned for its purpose to pass two short Bills, already sent to and rejected by the Senate. It is believed that :these strategic [measures, if submitted again to that embarrassing Chamber, will again be turned down, and, if that happenSj then the Government will claim a double dissolution on ordinary constitutional grounds. The first of these Bills, which concerns the withholding of preference from unionists, was read a first time i on the casting vote of the Speaker —an excitingly narrow margin. The cabled information which supplies these details adds a reference to a long stonewall. A few days ago, we were enlightened as to the temper of the House by a description of a disgraceful ami unktignified scene among members, who the sanctity of Parliament by brawling violently over blankets, brought in to comfort legislators' who were forced to spend the night in their seats. Something of the same tactics as distinguishes' party politics in the Dominion obtains in an equally emphatic form in the Commonwealth Parliament. Mr Fisher, in his pre-sessioual eam ; l>aign, appealed !,fi for reinstatement primarily on the ground that the Labour Government not only met the i liabilities created by its predecessors, but left a large surplus behind it when it was turned out to make place for the Cook Ministry. The retort to this is that the Labour Government owed its surplus to special legislation, and the Liberals had to provide for the Fishercreated obligations since. All. the conditions make for party antagonism unusually tense. Unable to control legislation in the originating House, the Labourites call on the Senate, and that body responds with a patriotism characteristic of Labour politicians who deify party. No wonder, then, that the Liberals are anxious to have the electorates express an opinion on such conduct; and it is not remarkable that Mr Fisher and his colleagues are fightingtooth and nail on behalf of their brethren in the Upper Hoiise. Of course, it is no certainty that, should there be. a dual appeal to the country, the Liberals would find their position bettered. In fact, defeat for them is not an imi ' possibility; but existing circumstances have ,worked up the Government to such a pitch that rather than continue to put up longer with a contumacious Senate that imposes such intolerable conditions it has decided to submit the case to the final court of appeal: the constituencies. Was there ever before any Government in the world in such a position? Or an Opposition? Whatever it may think of a dissolution in the House of Representatives, tlie Labour Party, it is certain, will exhaust all its resources to prevent the brcaking-up of the Upper Chamber for election purposes. The prolonged stonewall on the first reading of tlie initial test Bill, and the dangerously close division that followed, indicate admirably the earnestness of tlie contest. By the time the Government has forced this measure through all its stages (if it is able to do so), and reached the second test —dealing with the restoration of the postal vote—both sides will know they have been fighting. Should the Ministry have to rely only on Mr Speaker's vote for its majority, it is likely to suffer from nerve-racking experiences in this its attempt to evict an exasperating Senate. And if there is one thing of profit in *he whole business, it is the illustration it affords of what is possible in an Upper House elected by over-large constituencies.