BRITISH POLITICS.

Waikato Times, Volume 111, Issue 18641, 20 May 1932, Page 3

BRITISH POLITICS.

WEEK AT WESTMINSTER. LABOUR’S SURPRISING TURNABOUT WHEAT BILL THROUGH COMMONS (By "A Student of Politics”) LONDON, April 10. The political interest of Parliament this week has been in the sudden swerve of Labour Party policy on unemployment insurance. Before this week,' though Labour men (and others) have criticised the lack of uniformity in the application of the means test, the principle oif the test has not been challenged. The greater, therefore, was the surprise when, on Tuesday, iMr Lawson attacked the principle of a means test root and branch. Tuesday’s debate, which was on the financial resolution to prolong the present scale of transitional benefits to the middle of next year (by which time a unifying reform Bill will have become law), was continued on the second reading to-day. Mr Hudson went out of his way to give Labour a chance of repudiating Mr Lawson. Instead, speaker after speaker confirmed him and left no doubt whatever that the official poiicy of the Labour party is now against a means test in any shape or form and, indeed, against the contributory principle in unemployment insurance. This means, at a moderate computation, that Labour is prepared, if it gets the chance, to increase the cost of unemployment insurance by fifty millions a year—say by another shilling on the income-tax. Hopes Shattered. In a word, official Labour has learnt nothing by its crushing defeat IaST year, but is jrather stretching the policy that led to the break-up. Mr Maxton, in his very clever speech, expressed the logic of the situation perfectly. Labour leaders (to paraphrase his argument) were traitorous cowards when they took fright at last year’s financial crisis. What . they ought to have done was to shout ‘‘Hurrah! this is the break-up of the capitalist system for which we have waited forty years,” and givo the tottering structure another kick. That is very well from Mr Maxton. But that official Labour should accept this logic will bo a shock to those people who have been expecting to see a new Radical-Socialist parly rise from last year’s ashes. One must make allowance for the weakness which usually betrays parties into the forcible-feeble advocacy which is usually extreme. But if Labour is now indistinguishable from the J.L.P. it will be in Opposition for a generation, and the hopes of a live Labour Party must lie quite outside the present organisation. Both Mr Hudson and Sir Henry Betterton, one thought,' handled the new situation admirably on Friday.

Bad Drafting.

The House has this week given a J third reading to the Wheat Quota Bill, and parts from it without regret. Even its warmest friends admit that its provisions are expressed in language that is crabbed, awkward, and obscure, and, for all the immense importance of the measure, debale on it has been singularly ungrateful. The excuse was made for the style of the Bill that it is difficult to express mathematical formulae in words. Why not, then, have enacted the mathematical formula, if it would have been clearer? The wisest Act of Parliament is improved by being made simple and intelligible; and if pictures and diagrams make them clearer by all means let us have them, too. There will never be a real improvement until Parliament zeiuses to give a reading to any Bill that is not expressed in simple and inlclligiblo English. It will not do to say that the provisions are too complicated to be expressed in good English; for, if it were true, that would only mean that the idea is still half-baked and sliil not in a fit state to ho embodied in an Act of Parliament. One would not like to say that of tills Quota Bill, the main idea of which has many friends even among those who have criticised its detailed provisions. What Is Bread? It was amusing to notice how the House woke up on Thursday In the closing hours of the Report stage to ibo possibility of a little fun on the definition of bread. Bread is defined as Hour baked with water and salt and fermented with yeast so, however, that no such article shall he deemed to be bread unless it is In the form of a loaf weighing not less than iiozs. There was much elephantine gambolling with the definition. Perhaps more humorous than the jokes was Sir John Gilmour’s pronouncement that ho was not in favour of including caraway seeds, which, ic seems, German sailors in our ports insist on having in their bread. The fourteen ounces rule is curious, hut the weight is apparently fixed with i the deliberate object of excluding i buns, rolls, biscuits, cakes, and fancy bread, which aro relatively expensive. ' There was an interesting third reading debale, in which Mr Skelton, the Under-Secretary for Scotland, greatly pleased by liis opening speech, lie lias a very pleasant manner, candour, ana a sense of form and style. Sir John Gilmour is lb be congratulated I on pooling his difficult Bill through without misuup. Swo'jpstakos Inquiry. The Royal Commission on Sweepstakes and Loliciics, announced by the Home Secretary is, at any rale,• a recognition of ihc fact that our Jaw ; on these subjects is in an unliiiy mess j which needs clearing up. One womd ; have lzceii belter pleased if mo Gov- ! eminent had had ideas of im own for the devil e of a Royal Commission Is i always suspect as a sign of timidity J or o Ci to evade a decision. Sir William Davison evidently regarded [lie Commission as a shelving , of his own Bill lo allow a iimilcd l number ‘d licensed loilcries in Ibis 1 country after Ihe Irish model, lint, I # in any ease, that Bill did not get a ; gtiod enough majority when he inlro- J (lured it lo have much e.ianee. Now j that we aro to lia\e a Royal Com- j mission, it is la be hoped that iis leans of ' (ferenre will lie wide enough i ta cover ihe whole of our belting laws.,