BRITISH POLITICAL CRISIS.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXXV, Issue 13034, 30 March 1910, Page 5

BRITISH POLITICAL CRISIS.

THE LOROS.,AND THE BUDGET.

Labour Member’s: Views: i

The Premier’s Mistake.

Press Association.—Telegraph'.—Cop fright, LONDON. March 29. Mr Jowett, member for West Bradford, presiding at the Independent Labour Conference in London, said party government had reached the inevitable deadlock. The days of large majorities were numbered. Labour; Commoners ought to vote on every occasion according to their convictions, leaving the question of convenience to others. The election showed a substantial majority : against the Lords, but if the Nationalists voted against the Budget; ; tlie case against the Lords was gone, ■ because-, the • country,; as a ; whole would interpretf'it as the. rejection of the Budget. Mr Asquith had allowed the contest between the two Houses to lapse into an agitation for reform'over which election after election would possibly be fought, to the exclusion of other vital questions.

LORDS AND COMMONS

Resolutions by the Premier. The Lords’ Veto. And the Duration of Parliament. Received March 30, 9.15 a.m. - . LONDON, March 30. There was a crowded House when Parliament resumed, after the Easter ;recess. The Prince of Wales and many- ambassadors were present. Messrs H. H. Asquith, Prime Minister, and A; J. Balfour, Leader of the Opposition, met with enthusiastic receptions. The Premier moved that the House resolve itself into a committee to consider the .relations'of the two Houses, and the question of the duration of Parliament. He admitted that he had changed his youthful opinions, and now considered two Chambers expedient; ' He proceeded to develop a long constitutional argument to prove that the limitation of the veto and the shortening of the duration of Parliaments was. the most practical way of securing that the popular will shall not be frustrated. Referendum or a joint session of the two Houses, as was provided by the Australian Constitution, was inadmissible under existing circumstances. He concluded by claiming that the Lords’ power of absolute veto must follow the Crown’s veto . .before the road would be cleared for the advance of a full-grown and unfettered democracy. The Hon. A. J. Balfour is now replying.

The following are the details of the resolutions of which the Premier recently gave notice:—, I.—lt is expedient that the House of Lords should be disabled by law from rejecting or amending money Bi'.Jb. Money Bills are defined as Bills which the Speaker considers contain only provisions for, dealing with the imposition, ••c----pcal, remission, alteration, or regulation of taxation; also, charges on the Consolidated -Fund, or the provision of money by Parliament; also supply and appropriation, control, or regulation of public money; also the raising and guaranteeing of re-paymeht of loans, or matters incidental to these subjects. .

2.—lt is expedient that the- powers' of’ the House of Lords respecting Bills other than money Bills be legally’, restricted, so that when A Bill has’ passed the’ House of Commons in- three successive sessions, and has been sent to the House of Lords at least a month before the l end of the session and _ rejected in each of the three sessions,' it will become law without the consent of the House of Lords' upon receiving the Royal assent, provided that, at least two years shall have elapsed between the first introduction, of the Bill into the House of Commons and the date when it passes the House of Commons for-the third time.

Bills shall be treated as rejected if not passed by the House of Lords without amendment, or with only the amendments agreed to by both Houses.

3.—-It is expedient that the duration of Parliaments be limited to five years.