PETROL PETITION

Waikato Times, Volume 127, Issue 21242, 12 October 1940, Page 8

PETROL PETITION

HOUSE IS AMUSED MR FRASER SEES IRREGULARITY RULING ON POINT OF ORDER (By Telegrapn.—Special lo Times) WELLINGTON, Friday Nearly 2ft. was the thickness of a petition presented to the House of Representatives today praying for an increase in the allocation of petrol for use by private owners. It was presented by Mr S. G. Holland (Opposition—Christchurch North) on behalf of Mr James Roberts, president of the New Zealand Labour Party, and 31,467 others. There was laughter at the size of the petition when Mr Holland laid it on the top of his desk and again when he mentioned that it was on behalf of Mr Roberts and others. The Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. P. Fraser, submitted as a point of order that there were two irregularities. He pointed out that the custom seemed to be to choose the first signature to a petition and to present it as from that individual and others. On this occasion a good name, that of a man holding an important position, had been picked out. He had no complaint about that, although it did not seem to be following the usual custom. Evidence Lacking “The other point is a serious one,” the Prime Minister continued. He said he did not want to put it forward as a reason why the petition should not be acceptable to the House, as it might have been due to an oversight. On the petition, however, there was no evidence of the fact that the people who signed knew what they were signing. The Prime Minister pointed out that the signatures were not attached to the petition. Under Standing Order 387 it was provided that a petition should be signed by at least one person on the sheet on which the petition was written or typed. Thus on the prima facie evidence he would say that the petitioners did not know what they were signing, and he asked the Speaker, the Hon. W. E. Barnard, to instruct the committee concerned to ascertain that the signatories did know what they were signing. “I think it is due to this House that the committee should establish that the petitioners knew what they were petitioning about,” Mr Fraser added. Speaker’s Ruling The Speaker pointed out that it was usual for the first signatory to be mentioned, instead of picking out the name of an important signatory for the purpose, say, of effect. The other point was of more importance, as the petition did not comply with the standing order mentioned by the Prime Minister. The petition could be received, and he would draw the attention of the committee to that circumstance.

The Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes (Opposition —Hurunui): They cannot ask the 31.000. Mr W. J. Broadfoot (Opposition— Waitomo): Could we not correct the matter by one of us signing on the front sheet now? (Laughter.)