THE PARLIAMENTARY CLOTURE.

Waikato Times, Volume XVI, Issue 1381, 10 May 1881, Page 3

THE PARLIAMENTARY CLOTURE.

Recent transaction in the Imperial Parliament has had the effect of directing special attention to these questionable modes of procedure by which the business can, at the hands of a few refractory members, be obstructed or otherwise indefinitely postponed. The subject is one of equal, if not greater importance to this and the other colonies, as it is a well-known fact that the business of these Parliaments is suffering almost constantly at the hands of a few obstructionists. The following is a brief summary of the methods adopted in various Legislative Assemblies to prevent proceedings of the kind :—: — In Denmakk, if the President considers that a debate is being improperly drawn out, then he can propose the cloture, which shall be decided by the Chamber without debate. Likewise any 15 (in the Landsthing 12) mcmbeis united may demand that the cloture be put to the vote. The names of these members &hall bo lead out. In "Belgium, in the Senate, the close of the debate ("cloture") may be demanded by five members, in the Chamber of Representatives by ten members, and may be pronounced by a vote of the Assembly. Theie is. also a mode of checking the undue prolixity of a speaker, viz., that of " closing him to the question," and finally ot withdrawing his right to speak on the subject during the rest of the sitting. In Feanck, before prononnc'nsr the cloture, the President consults the House, and it the parole bo demanded for the purpose of .spe.ikinpr against the cloture it can only bo granted to one speaker. Should there be any doubt as to the dcciHion of the Chamber after a second vote haß been taken, the discupsion continues. The cloture once pronounced, the parole can only be allowed on the position of the question In Germany, at any time during a debate a member may submit a motion in writing to the President in favor either of adjourning- or of closing the dihcui-siou (cloture). Such motion must be suppoited by 30 members. When this is done, the President puts the question "that f he debate bo closed," and the House, without requiring the mover to defend his motion by arguments, and without further discussion proceeds to vote by show of hands. In THK AUhTKO-H"UNG\RIAN REICHSRATH, the President may put a motion to close the debate to the vote at any time, and a simple majority suffices to carry it. This must be done, however, without interruption to any speech in actual course of delivery. When a vote to close the debate is passed, each party for and against the proposition uuder discussion shall choose ons" member to make a final speech for it. If, however, after these two speeches any member of the Government rises, the debate shall be considered to be reopened. In Holland, if five membprs desire the closing ot the debate preceding the speech in defence of the proposal, the President puts it to the vote after the members have been heard who wish to support or oppose the cloture. When the cloture has been agreed iipon, the members must not again ask to speak on the proposal except after it has been defended by the heads of departments of the Government, or Commissaries of the King, or by members by whom a proposal has been made. These "latter are allowed to speak whenever and as often as they desire it— not, however, before the member who is actually speaking has finished his speech. In Italy one member only ban the right of speaking against the cloture beiwa it in pronounced, but once the cl*t'ire has been decided by the Chamber and pronouced by the President, the debate ceaHen, and no further speaking is permitted, unless some member who mny have been personally alluded to in the course of the debate demands to speak on a personal matter {per nnfitto pcr&onale); but he « bound to confine himself to the personal explanation, and must not enter into the subject matter of the debate. Any member, however, who may have given notice of an order of the day before the cjbtlire has been pronounced has the right S? r %yeloping it after it has been pronounced. In R« and Noeway it is stated that there is "hardly any guarantee against malevolent waste of the public time in the debates of the Diet. Every member of either Chamber possesses the privilege of speaking aa often and at whatever length he chooses on any question under debate, wttiM; the majority has no right, as in Prance ajna" elsewhere to demand the cloture fii fact, the only check which exists againFt abuse is the moral preeeure of an impatient Ohamhet, and the wholeiome influence of unrestricted publicity.

No complaint has, however, yet arisen, as to any abuse of thia excessive liberty of speech, as has been the case in Norway and Deuraark, the Swedish character being lesß addicted to garrulity than those of some other countries. In Spain the cloture may be said to exist indirectly, and to result in the action allowed to the President on the order of Parliamentary discussion. This action may be brought to bear by him at his own discretion, in ordor to postpone the discussion of any question in the orders of the day before (he Chamber until the next sitting. The question next in order will then be debated. The effect of this procedure is to facilitata Government business, by enabling them either to adjourn or bring on any particular discussion during any particular sitting. In fact it enables them to arrange the busineua before the Chamber as best suits their convenience. The President has not the power of arbitrarily declaring the sitting- closed, and can only do so in the caso of general disorder in the Chamber, which can't otherwise be dealt with. The Presidents of both Chambers are virtually nominated by the Government in power, although in theory elected irrespective of political bias. Their action, therefore, on all discussions may be said to emanate di» reotly from the Ministry, which thus indirectly obtains the control more or Jesa over all debates on the questions of the order of the day. In the United States the practice is as follows :— (1) There shall be a motion for the previous question, which, being ordered by a majority of members present, if a quorum, shall have the effect to cut off all dfbato and bring the House to a diiect votK upon the immediate question or questions on which it has been asked and ordered. The previous question may be asked and ordered upon a single motion or series of motions allowable under the rules, or an amendment or amendment*, or may be made to embrace .ill authorised motions or amendments, and include the bill to its engrossment and third reading, and then, on renewal rind seconding of said motion, to its passage or rejection. It shall be in order peudina; the motion, for or after the previous question shall have been ordered on its passage, for the Speaker to entertain and submit a motion to commit, with or without instructions, to a Standincr or Select Committee, and a motion to lay upon the table shall be in order on the second and third reading of a bill, (2) A call of the House shall not be in order after the previous question is ordered, unless it shall appear upon an actual count by the Speaker that a quorum is not present. (3) All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made for the previous question, and pending such motion, 6hall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, with debate.