THE UPPER HOUSE

Taranaki Daily News, 2 April 1934, Page 9

THE UPPER HOUSE

IT’S EXISTENCE ESSENTIAL «<’ x HON. EDWARD NEWMAN’S VIEW. Marton, March 27. “It is a matter for sincere congratulation that there is no question of abolishing the second Chamber in .New Zealand, said the Hon. Edward Newman, C.M.G., replying to the toast of “Parliament,’’ at a complimentary social tendered to Mr. Arthur Way here to-night.

He said he was more proud to have belonged to the Legislative Council than to the House of Representatives. “The Legislative Council is different from the other Chamber, in one particular point,” he said. “The members have no constituents to give reasons to and they do not talk. , Most of the work is done in committee with. no Press representative present. So the Legislative Council confines itself to work. (Laughter.) Speaking with my experience of both Chambers, I may say that the Statutes Revision Committee of the second Chamber is the most valuable link in the legislative machinery of this country. With no personal feelings and. ; without party bias, I feel proud when /I think of the public spirit, absence? oOferty prejudice and devotion to duty or‘the Legislative Council. There, the work is done entirely free from any; othermotive but the good ,of the country.” ; .Mr. Newman added that of a second Chamber was other countries, including every British Dominion as well as America and France. Although he had once voted for an. elective Upper House, he said he had since changed his mind. “With all its faults it is better for the good of the country to have a nominated and not an elective system,” he said, pointing out that if an elective House was decided upon the present electorates of Rangitikei, Manawatu, Otaki and Wanganui

would probably elect one representative. “What chance, under those circumstances, would a poor but able man have of gaining a seat where an election would cost probably double what it. costs at present?” he asked. “The duties also would take all his time. There is another point; an electorate such as I have described would return a member practically duplicating the opinions of its representatives in the Lower House.” Discussing the subject later with the Wanganui Chronicle, Mr. Newman said that the duties of the Council were, first, to revise all Bills sent up by the Lower House; second, to delay the progress of a Bill until the constituencies and the Press had time to fully\ digest it; three, to initiate legislation that the other House will not initiate. “In every British-speaking country it is fully realised that the will of the people must prevail ultimately,” he said, “but it should be a well-thought-out and wellinformed will; not the hasty decision of an impulsive body of, men, perhaps biased by - party influences. Speaking after, experience of over 20 years in one or other. branch of the New Zealand legislature, I have no hesitation in saying that - the services rendered by the Legislative. Council have been invaluable,. .and it: would ■ be a national disaster if .this Chamber were weakened or rendered less independent. .. In my - experience the second Chamber has been free .frojn .party bias. Over and over again I have seen the Council amend and alter Bills directly against the wishes of the other House and of the Government of the Dominion. In my opinion the large majority of new members of the Legislative Council should , be-ex-members of the Lower House. Experi-

ence is required to make good lawmakers. Parliament is just what the people make. it.' All classes are represented there, but my experience has taught me that the people of New Zealand expect, and rightly so, their representatives to have higher ideals and to live up to higher ideals than the majority of the electors live up to themselves. lam finding no fault with that, but I believe it. to be true, and I hope strong men will always be interested in politics.” .