The Wanganui Chronicle FRIDAY, JULY 6, 1934. THE SILENT OPPOSITION

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 77, Issue 158, 6 July 1934, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle FRIDAY, JULY 6, 1934. THE SILENT OPPOSITION

;pn< Labour Opposition has scored a tactical victory by deciding to take no part in the Address-in-Reply debate. For long enough it’has been the custom of the Government of the day to blame the Opposition for prolonging debates and holding up the business of the country. As a matter of fact, both the Government and the Opposition, by commanding their members to Hansardise, were both playing the game for each other. Parliament is inefficient, and the legislation which should be available for the discussion by both Houses is not available until late in the session, when it is rushed through with a minimum of consideration. Only last session the two Houses were guilty of passing legislation dealing with the sale of petrol within the Dominion, but when an attempt was made to implement the Act it was found to be unworkable. To this inefficiency all parties contribute. The Address in Reply gives the Government some respite, during which some of the Bills are rushed up to finality before being presented to the House. By cutting short the Address in Reply the Opposition reveals the unreadiness of the Government for the session. What prompted the Opposition to take the action which they have? The prompting was the disconcerting of the Government, plus the fact that the publie is out of patience with the whole of the Address-in-Reply debates. The public cannot be expected to be enthusiastic over the poor quality and the dull speeches, and the trivialities which comprise the Address in Reply. Indeed, there has been for some time a considerable degree of dissatisfaction with the whole functioning of Parliament. For this there is not one party which can escape a share of the blame. But in all things let fairness prevail, and in this matter in particular let the blame be rightly placed for the unsatisfactory character of Rarliament. The blame for the poor quality of the politicians who are in the House of Representatives rests wholly and solely on the electors. If better men are not in Parliament it is because they are not elected to it. There, are better men on the outside of the House than inside it. It is the duty of the electors to sec that the right men get on the inside of the House. If the electors fail in their duty then there is no ground for expressing surprise or dissatisfaction with the quality of the debates. It must be remembered that the Address in Reply could and should perform a very useful function, namely a general survey of the administration and policy of the Government. The fact that it has failed to fulfil that function to such an extent that one great party in the House has withdrawn from the farce, is by no means a matter for satisfaction. It is, on the other hand, a matter for grave concern, because it reveals that Parliament has eeased to function in an important particular. “Every nation gets the Government it deserves,’’ is an historical and a political truism. New Zealand is now being governed by an inefficient Parliament, because it is the inefficient people outside of Parliament who send so many of like unto themselves to represent them there.