THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, JUNE 24, 2005. CHRISTCHURCH POLITICIANS.

Temuka Leader, Issue 5263, 24 June 1905, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, JUNE 24, 2005. CHRISTCHURCH POLITICIANS.

The Christchurcli papers publish a report of a conference held between the Trades uud Labor Council of that city and the local members of Parliament. Tin; report makes ,rather interesting reading; Amongst other questions put to the members they were asked if they favored abolishing the Legislative Council. They all said they did, but it was necessary that a Revisory Committee. or some other body should be appointed in its stead. The necessity for a second , body, Mr Tanner said, existed because "legfisjlation left the Lower House in a rcry scandalous state,." This is too funny for anything. For real downright ridiculousness it surpasses any of the most extravagant creations of Gilbert and Sullivan. Here are several members of Parliament saying in effect "We do our work scandalously. Please repose confidence in us, but get rid of the Legislative Council, 'which corrects our work and puts it right," Now, what would an employer say if some of his servants came to him and said "We do our work scandalously bad. Please keel) us on » hut get lid of those fellows who correct our work and put it right." This is tho class of men that are making laws in the Lower Housemen so incapable of seeing the fitness of things as to admit that their work leaves their hands in a scandalous state. But we quite endorse what they say. The work leaves their hands in a scandalous state, and the Legislative Council puts it ritght, and if ever the day cornea that the Legislaj tive Council is abolished the country will live to regret;it. f f\Yhat,»really happens is this. The .Lower House, spends too much time in wrangling? and too little in studying their actual work; When Bills are going through .committee, a great many amendments arc .usually proposed, and some are carried, and sufficient consideration is not oiven to them. TITe consequence is that':the. amendments and alterations do not always hang together very well, 'and arc frequently at variance with other parts of the Bill. The language also is frequently not clear nor grammatical, and all this the Legislative Council has to put right. There is no body of men in New Zealand worse treated than _the Legislative Council. They do this work, and nobody knows anything about it, and • their reward is ruffianly abuse. There is one way in which the Lower House/, behaves disgracefully to the Upper House. . At election -/-times, members give pledges thoughtlessly, in' ia&t a man.who wants to get in wi 1 ! promise ; anything. When the questions come r ' up in. Parliament ho must vote for 1 them, knowing that he is doing wrong 1

and then goes to bis friends in the Legislative Council and aßks them to 'chuck them <out,' He next comes before his constituents and abuses the Council in the most violent terms for doing that which he desired. No session passes in which Bills ■ do not roach the Council which are intended 1 to bo "chucked out" there, and loir doin'g the dirty work of the Lower Houso in this way the Council is abused. This is the mean, cowardly way in which the Lower House acts very frequently, and (lie Council has never yet retaliated, though it has often felt keenly the) disgraceful scandalous manner in which it has been treated.

Referring again to the Christchurch conference, we find the members ojf. the Lower House who are in favor of abolishing the Upper House stating that some other body must bo put in its place because tho work of the Lower jlouse leaves it '''in a very scandalous state." Could there possibly be any argument in favor of the Legislative Council more forcible than this ? Even Mr T. E. Taylor, who has heaped more abuse on the Council than the whole of New Zealand put together, admits that a revising, body is absolutely necessary. Then since some revising body is necessary, why make the change ? What is the good of changing for change sake.? .Before the Council can be abolished and a revising Committee put in its stead, tho Imperial Parliament must pass an Act to enable it to be done, and what will be gained by it ? The change will consist in this :. : The Legislative Council has power to make law in conjunction with the Lower House. The proposed ltevising Committee would have no power to make law. Its functions would be limited /to correcting the language of the Lower House, but it would have no power to correct the law as passed by the. Lower House, or of checking hasty legislation. That is the difference which would bo brought about. Mark you it is not proposed to abolish a second chamber altogether. What is really proposed is to take away the power to cheek hasty legislation, or to alter the Jaw as it passes the Lower House. Now that is all that is proposed, and we ask thinking people to ask themselves is the change desirable ? Is it desirable that there should bo no check on the Lower House, the members of which admit that there must be some body to correct their very scandalous work? In this colony the votes of all boys aiid girls over twenty one years are equally as powerful at election times as the votes of Messrs Seddon and Massey. The vote of the girl who was twenty-one years yesterday will count in an election exactly as much as tho vote of the ablest man in New Zealand. Now, with a franchise so extensive as that, is there not a danger that a majority in favor of some foolish fad, or some sentimental folly may be elected to Parliameot V And if there is nothing to chock them is there not a risk that mischief muy be done ? A Ik-vising Chamber could not check them, because it would have no legislative power, but a Legislative Council could and would do it, andifor that reason we say that it is not desirable to take away from the Legislative Council the powers which it at present possesses. But coining now to solid facts, we ask what has the Council done to merit the odium which is at present being heaped upon it. Has not tho Legislative Council passed all the splendid laws which have made the colony so prosperous anil which are the admiration of the whole civilised world ? Every one of these laws had to pass the Council, and that being so we ask, where is the justification for i abolishing it ? Can anyone point out one reform the Council has blocked, with the exception of the referendum ? That is the only .measure which the Council blocked, and if it did nothing else but block that miserable abortion it justified its existence.