SECOND BALLOT BLOCKADE."

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14829, 21 November 1913, Page 12

SECOND BALLOT BLOCKADE."

DETERMINED STAND BY THE OPPOSITION.

rLKTHORA OF AMENDMENTS.

MANY POINTS OF OIU>ER

UrtCIAl- TO "THK rRES«.' ; )

WELLINGTON, "November 20. That iho Opposition arc determined to block" by every possible moans the of the proposed clauso in the L<-{jMaturw Act Amendment Bill, repoalinpt tho second ballot principle, wa? xmpiy shown by their attitude* this afternoon. When the time camo for t/f moiioii to bo presented, practically every member of the - Opposition io*e in su< was ion and intimatod his intention of moving amendments to the Bill moiitiomal when it was in Committee. In many cu*cs the member* road the lwigthy amendments through, and this necessarily took up a great d*al of time. Mr McCallum created a ripple of interest by coolly savins that ho intended to movo seventy-two amendments, "a II important and many of far-reaching effect." PR ELI MIX AR V MAY. When tiutio tactics had wasted nearly three quarters of an hour. Mr Ell rose lor th«" second time to pive. notice of certain amendments. H<« was proceeding to read tho proposed amendments i which consisted of a rejected Bill of a icrmer year dealing with the referendum), when Mr Speaker pointed out that it was not necessary for members 10 read this tvhoio of their amendments; it, n-,18 snfiicient to jpvo notice of certain amendments. Sir Joseph Ward: But he may read them if he wishes to? . Mr Speaker «aid that this was so. but ho did not think that the Leader of ihe Opposition would suggest that this privilege should bo taken advantage of u> the full extent. Sir.Joseph Ward said that tho Bill was a most important one, and it was desirable that every member should have nu opportunity of knowing what these amendments were. Mr Speaker eaid that it was a most unusual thing to read tho wholo of the amendment? when giving notice of them. Ho would not,xulo that it was out of order to do 50, but would leave tiio matter to the good sense of members. It was his duty us Speaker' to maintain order. Sir Joseph Ward again, referred to the importance'of the Bill. Tho J'rijuo -Minister said that what wasi gouty 01: was not consistent with constitutional privilege or custom, What was being done was being done with tho object of wasting time — e>ir Joseph Ward: Who is responsible? -Mr Massey.; 80 as to prevent tho j opinion of a majority of the Houso be- I )»H placed upon the Statute Book. That i v tho real trouble. THE SECOND HURI>LE. Afc twenty minutes past three, when the Orders of the Day woro called O n I».v tho Speaker, Sir Joseph Ward raised the second hurdle in tbe defence of tho Opposition, lie desired, he said, to wove "the adjournment of the House, and ho based thia action on the following rulin<» (No ap> of Mr Speaker:—"Tha adjournment r»l the Hutiso cannot be moved after the Speaker has directed the clerk to call on tho Orders of the Day, until that direction i* complied with, and -Ihon only as a means of Retting rid of iho order called, on. The members moving tho adjournment can only refer to that order, and cannot introduce extraneous matter," . This ruling tvus pYon. on .April 26th, 1860, and under it ho asked if ha did sot havo tho right to discuss the first Order of thoDay, which; in, this case, was tho legislature. Act Amendment Bill. The Hon. W. F. Massey eaid that in 1&94 t hero'had been a revisaon of the Standing. Orders, end since then no attempt had. been made to roovo the adjournment of the, Houso until the business had booncompletod, or in eonnoxion .with the diuQusaion of question*. It was agninat the, intention of the Standing Orders at present that peh «n innovation as proposed by Sir Jtvseph "Ward.should bo permitted. The ■ Leader of tho Opposition contended that the Standing Order* go.vcruihß his point had never been settled,' and ho was, therefore, entitled to move as he did, and to spoak to "tho first Order of the Day. After som© further debate Mr Speaker said ho was prepared to rule. Tljb position, he believed, was as it was first stated. It waa a very unusual Moeedure, but he took it that Mr Speaker-O'Rorke'a ruling- hold, and he, ikorefore, billed that an hon. member conld. nioVfl th* adjournment of the llous*, but ha must keep strictly to tho question of adjoununent, wad not dobate any other setter at all. > In the okl days it-"was tho practice for any member to cot up in tho middle of questions and move tho adjournment, hilt' that'waa not tho caso now. He thought a member would bo in order in moving the adjournment of the House, but ho must keep etrictly to tho.question of adjournment, and not introduce any other matter at all.

The Prime Minister immediately rose a-nd suggested thai as this was a very important matter, the Speaker should take time to consider the proposal, and finally decide. (Opposition dissent.) Members should recollect, said the Prime Minister, the circumstances under which the alterations were mado.

Sir Joseph Ward rose to a point of. order, and asked why the Prime Minister, should bo allowed to traverse" the ruling of the Speaker after his decision had been given, , The Speaker suggested that Mr Massey should be permitted to contii ao.~

Mr Massev urged that it had not been unusual for Speakers in the past to give tentative rulings and defer fuller consideration , to later on. This should be one of those tentative rulings, tor it was a very_ important matter, in his opinion. When the Orders wojo altered in 1594, the practice which was referred to in this ruling of taking questions on every day was dropped, and now was confinw] to one day.. Hβ therefore believed that it was tho intention to do away with the -practice sought io bo revived. A POINT IN DOCBT. . After some further talk, the £>[>eakor kaid that there was only one matter of doubt in his mind, and* that was as to whether a private member of tho House tenld move the Adjournment. He coukl net find any Standing Order to enable a private member to do so, although at the same time he could not see any Order which prevented him from doing »o. lie was certain, however, that if it could bfi domvthV discussion would save to b*i confininl to the question of *diournmfint. Under the tjicumMtjinces, boutwr. he-would surest thafc the House should allow Imu to reserve his decision on tho point of doubt. air Joseph Wani.tbcn suti-estwl that consjcWaiion of the Bill should be deferred till the next day, as if they ft

went into Committee, they might not get into tho ayain for a month or sis woeks.

Ac this Massey made some intsrjeetions which thouith inaudible in the Press Gallery, afterwards appeared to l>e lo tho offwt: ''You will find cut to the contrary." Sir Joseph Ward retorted; ''I i\m surprised to find the Prime Minister suggesting that something unusual will bo ilono to us." Did Mr Massey, he asked, propose to influence the Speak.pr and the Chairman of Committees. All they wanted was strict impartiality and 110 collusion of any sort.

Mr Massey retorted that what lie meant. wa.« that tho hon. gentleman had not a full and proper of tho Standing Orders. Thero wore Standing Orders of which ho h:ul never heard, but of which he would hear liefore Iftng. Mr Mafcsey closed by denying that he had rvor brought any pressure , to hear upon cither the Speak-r-r or th<:> Chairman of Committees. He would be the last one to do so. "A LITTLE TIFF." j Both the Speaker .and the t'liniriiinii ! 0." Commit tecs denied that any influence at all on th«M>art «f the GoveniI mem was brought to bear upon them. While Mr Malcolm was makinp: tlais (]ecl;ir;uioii. Mr Hanan interjected. "'I hnve heard them prompting yon in Committee. Can you deny it- , " Mr MaieohiJ that never i:i any way had th« Government attenii'tHil to inlluenr*' him. Mr Mas>oy Minucdintrly cnlled a.tteiuion to this interjection, which, lift urged, was one of which noiico had to be taken. Mr Hnnnn volunteered to rencsit what lie had said. It was, he claimed, "H»;ve Ministers in Committee prompted you?" A .'•■iiont 01' '"No, no' 1 came from tho Government benches at this, but Mr ilanan rotated that t'ni« wa« what ho hud said. Mr Massey s.".id he would ask . the Speaker to rail Mr Hanan to order, or call upon him for an explanation. Mr HantiK repoat«vl hia ox"hmation, and asserted that his remark hail Immjii mado in the interrogative form. Mr Malcolm, ivhon appealed i" . c ;ii<l that I'U impression was that Mr llnnan said "1 have heard thorn doing it in Committee." Ho did at times, he added, converse, with Ministers, hut never upon a point of order. Thr* matter was then allowed to drop. F FTC RE 310 YES. Reverting to M"r Massey'e interjection. Sir Joseph Ward «aid that he had always received fair-play from both the. Speaker and tho Chairman of Committees. At tho same time he was surprised at Mr Masse.y's ' interject job, and becainse he remembered the stonewalls of tho past, when no attempt was made to curtail the rights of members., lie wondered what Mr Massey meant. He, therefore, asked him the question. The Prime Minister replied thaithere were precedents on record ia "Hansard" which went to show that certain powers were given to the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees to prevent obstruction by a mmoritv of members in tho House. - 'Mr Russell: Closure by precedent? Mr Massey: lam not saying whether it ia the closure or not. It has been done, and when the proper time comes I will quote where it has been done. THE LONG FIGHT- BEGINS. At ten minutes past four tho Orders of tho Day were called on and too House weut into Committee on tne Legislature Act. Amendment JiiU. Mr G W. Russell having opened tho stonewall. Mr "Brown, moved to str*o the word "•••Act" out of the short titlo ■Sth'tlie object ot insert ng the word "Statute." The word 'Act' is th< second-word in the short title. At amendment to strike out the hrst word "This-" was defeated on'lucsaay night, 'The- debate" then weut on steadily till half-pa»t fiye on tho, question ol whether the word "Act" should should not he retained.The blockade was resumed at <—K> r> m and ran on without'any ■particular incident until 8.45' P-™-«, ff hen the Opposition, having . exhausted the, ■rigU «f speaking m regard -to the amendment,. thp nufestton was put, withthe result that the amendment nas reiected by 38 votes to 19. . Mr Wilford then moved to insert after the word "Act" tho following words: ''Shall not .come "to force until the Ist of Ap.n1.1910 and. \ft-or the discussion on Mr Wjlford si mnendment had proceeded for some time, ltusscll moved to import proer This was bpoken to ljy the.stonewallers at Rfeut length, but enecchw contained notjung but a wonti-. noma repetition of stock phrasen and. tiroo-worn platitudes. . "Mr Wilford, in epeakmg snortly after half-past eleven, gave two reasons, in support of reporting progress. Jho I\rst /as that he had hay fever, and the second was that he. had to attend, an inquest at vim. o'clock the following morning. Mr Wilford. like other members, w.as eventually pulled up for irrelevancy. At 12.1u a division npon the motioei to report profrre.ss v.txs taken, hut the defeat was solid —3il votes to 10. ' Mr Wilford then produced for stonewall purposes the kugKestivo ' i n ment "That consideration of tln> Bull should be deferml till April Ist, 191o." At tho same time h« intimat«<l that ii that date were not successful, he could; try JStareh or April, and so on ad iniinitum— a pleasant prospect. About this time jhe . Cnrtirman. (Mr Malcolm), who had been in tho chair continuously sincp foiir o'clock hi the afternoon, was relieved by 3fr W. H. I). Bell. ' Tiie stonewall -was proceeding on dreary lines, wheii. tho ToK'graph Office closed Ut '2 a.m. •