PARLIAMENT IS GETTlNG TO BUSINESS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17890, 5 July 1926, Page 10

PARLIAMENT IS GETT I N G TO BUSINESS.

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY DEBATE CONCLUDED. (Special to the “Star.”) Press Gallery, Saturday. All bad things come to an end in time, and the demise of the Address-in-Reply debate this session was no bad thing. It is many a year since there has been such a vapid and dry debate. In the first place, the Opposition concentrated on topics which are not really acute subjects of discussion in the New Zealand political realm. To mention only one thing: The representation of New Zealand at the Labour Conference at Geneva. From the point of view of the abstract theorists of the Labour Party this may appear to be a subject of paramount importance, but it is very questionable whether the rank and file of the Labour movement are really interested in the question whether Labour is or is not represented at Geneva. The emphasis which the Labour Opposition has laid on this particular aspect of politics in the course of the debate has commanded little attention, and as a subject of no-confidence in the Government it has aroused no interest at all. The wider issues of taxation, cost-of-living and humanitarian legislation in general have this year not come under the purview of the Opposition. This is all to the disadvantage of the Opposition from the point of view of Parliamentary polemics. In other words, they have “ missed the bus ” and have receded rather than gained in popular estimation. However, the •Address-in-Reply debate, such as it has been, is now a thing of the past, and it would be a bold man indeed who would wish for 1 another fortnight of such platitudes and generalities such as the House has been wearied with. During the week there was a little discour.se on political slogans. “The man who gets things done” is a phrase which has now passed into history. It has been all along recognised by farseeing political observers that this was a slogan which would some day lead to trouble, and it is therefore interesting to note that the Prime Minister has taken the first opportunity available of repudiating any suggestion that he had given this caption his benediction before it was launched on the public. Fie denied this week that he was in any way partial to bragging, and put on record his denial of ever having fathered the reputation which has been given him by enthusiastic but not altogether discreet admirers. He admitted that he was not the man who could get things done, and he made it clear that he had never pretended to be such an immaculate person. This confession of meekness raised him in the estimation of the House, and it must be admitted that he was very frank about the matter. Still, “the man who gets things done” is a reputation which has come to stay, and it will be a load of worry which Mr Coates will probably have to carry until the end of his political career. NOT SO SAVAGE. A sudden discovery was made by Mr T. Forsyth, the new member for Weli lington East, during the week. He solemnly announced that, strange to

say, the Labour members were not so extreme as he had expected to find them. Mr Forsyth is a gentleman who, in his public life in Wellington, has been prone to sling “brickbats” at the Labour Party, and his enlightenment on the point of the Labour Party's want of savageness since he has been a member of Parliament must have been highly gratifying to the occupants of the Labour benches. Mr Lee accounted for the moderation of the Labour Party by the loss of its whiskers. This is probably true, for a recollection of the General Election brings to mind the fact that the Labour Party had its beard singed very badly. The much-discussed topic of dairy control has had a preliminary canter in- the House, but it would appear to be apparent that all the threats which have been made against the Act are doomed to defeat, because the combination of the Labour Party and the Government Party will be sufficient to keep things as they are. It all depends on the point of view, of course, but some may be tempted to recall the saying that birds of a feather flock together. However, this is a matter on which we shall hear more later on, although it must be admitted that Socialism is like the “flu”— it is likely to have a vogue, and then die when its due time comes. Mr J. A. Nash and Mr W. A. Veitch promise to assume the role of scarifiers and purifiers when the first opportunity of having a say on the matter of control presents itself. They have had a good flutter already. DOWN TO BUSINESS. Having killed the Address-in-Reply debate, the next best thing the House could do was to get down to the real work of the session. So, with an eye to the next' General Election, it t>roceed©d to say that it did not think that individual members had sufficient in the way of expenses to advertise their virtues to the electors in the same way as the Prime Minister had in November, and then passed on to consideration of the first of the Government’s measures for the session. It put one or two Bills through their second readings, and considered that it had done well considering that the session had been going for only a little a fortnight, and the Government had been unkind enough to unsheath a scabbardful of Bills on Thursday afternoon, amounting to eighteen in number. It was the late Mr Massey who once said that Parliament had now become an institution for amending legislaI tion, but -whether or not this was a I mild aspersion on the quality of the legislation of the previous Government, it is a fact that for the last few sessions Parliament has not been asked to do much more than consolidate or amend existing statutes. Most of the' first instalment of this Administration’s measures have partaken of the nature of consolidations, but the “window dressings” will probably not be long in making their appearance. NO ELECTORAL REFORM. There is one thing, however, on which the Government apparently does not intend to flaunt attractive displays, and that is the matter of electoral reform. The Prime Minister made this clear on Friday when, in reply to Sir Joseph Ward, he said that it was not intended by the Reform Party to bring in legislation on the lines of proportional representation or preferential voting. With two-thirds of the Chamber in their keeping, the Reform Party may be pardoned for drinking “Success to First-past-the-Post.”