THE UPPER HOUSE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1237, 20 September 1911, Page 5

THE UPPER HOUSE.

HOW TO REFORM IT. MR. MASSETS IDEA DISCUSSED. Reform of the Legislative Council was discussed in the House o£ Representatives last night in connection with tho Estimates. Mr. Massey moved to reduce tho item of the Legislative vote by .£5 as an indication of opinion that the members of the Logislaive Council, should bo elected. Hβ pointed to the importance of the functions which tho Council could exercise iu the way of initiating, amending, and rejecting legislation. During the twenty years that tho present Government had been in power, they had not appointed anyono in tho Council who was not a supporter of their own. Tho present system suited the party in power. Thero were people in all parts of the country waiting and honing for such appointments, 'flic time was ripe tor a cliaiigo, and the system adopted should bo proportional representation. Mr. W. H. Herries (Tauranga) said that if members could vote without the cracking of the party whip, most of them would yoto for an elective Upper House. A motion by Mr. Herdman tome years ago, similar to the present one, was only defeated'by two votes. Sooner or lutcr an elective Upper House- was bound to come. Tho Premier's Views. The Prime Minister (Sir J. G. Ward) said ho remembered the Upper House at tho time when the present Government came into power twenty yeais ago. Tho Upper Hoiih'C tlien consisted wholly of Conservatives nominated by tho party previously in power. ■ Mr, Massey: It's tho same now, Sir Joseph Ward went on to say Vhat tho outgoing Government at that time just as they wore going out appointed twelve members of tho Upper House, and they were called tho twelve apostles. Liberal legislation was so thwarted by that House that the Ballanoe Government had found it necessary to introduce tho seven years' system, but it was not until nino years ago that they could count upon a majority iu that place, llatker than the change proposed by Mr. Massoy, ho thought it would be better to have only one House. Large electorates would bo retrogressive. What chance would the unknown poor man have against a well-known man in an electorate mado up of six of the present onesP Most Governments would bo glad to be rid of the burden of patronage connected with the appointment of the Legislative Council, but it would not be right to deny the people of the country the rSgliP to get a majority of the kind they wished iu tho Upper House through tboir majority in tho Lower House. Who Are the Conservatives? Mr. Massey said that in Australia tho Federal Senate was elected "by .very largo constituencies, co-terminous, in fact, with the Slates, but Labour was more largely represented in tho Senate than the House. If a Conservative was one wlio always appointed a person of his own way of thinking to any vacant position, then tho present Government was thoroughly Conservative.' It Ihe nominative system was to bo continued, ho would prefer nomination for lii'o rather tuan the seven years' system because then- they would get independence. He thought' a 'second Chamber for revising purposes was necessary, and he could think of no better method of electing ono than that which he had proposed. The Legislative Council ought to be a more important body than the House of Mr. D. M'Laren (Wellington East) said that an Upper House, as proposed by Mr. Massey, would obstruct democratic legislation. The Prime Minister, referring to Mr. Massey s suggestion in his Wellington speech that the members of Iho Upper Houso should sit foT six years, said that during the latter part of their term they might be blocking tho legislation of the Lower House. He believed tho easiest and most logical measure of reform would be to have tho Upper House elected by the House of Kepresentativcs. A Poor Compliment. Mr. Lang said it was a very poor compliment lo tho Upper House as appointed by the present Government when they had to get a gentleman, from outside with no Parliamentary experience to lead it. Mr. G. Anderson (Mataura) declared that until proportional representation was adopted thero would nevor be proper representation cither in that House or in the Upper House, Mr. D. Duick (Palmorston North) promised to support the amendment. -Proportional representation was in the air and it would be a good thing to try it upon tho Upper House. My. T. M. Wilford (Hutt) said that if it were possible ho would vote to abolish the Upper House. Its existence at present led members to slur the work of Icgiiation. Ho believed this country could ba run very well with ono Howe of I ailiament and with fewer members. If Bills could bo submitted to about onequarter as many members as there were at present, there would bo better and more efhcient legislation. Present Parliamentary methods were cumbersome. While tho bi-cameral system continued he supposed the present Upper Houso won d do. In fact, any old thiV would do. ° "An Excrescence." a Mr -u 71l hQT rr ( Wc " in Kt°» Central) described the Upper House as an excrescence upon the public life of tho country. It was of no use and was not wanted The non. D. Buddo said that (he adoption of the proposal before tho nouso would not be an improvement. The Hon. J. A. Millar said they wore being asked (o affirm something without any details being given. .They were beinir asked to affirm an Elective Upper House without being told anything about the franchise. No blank chequo would bt> given with his consent. Mr. Mnssey said this was tho onlv opportunity they had of taking (he sense of the House upon the matter at issue. Tho question to bo voted upon was whether the people who made the laws should be elected by tho people who had to abide by the laws. After several more speeches had been made, Mr. Buxton protested against |,h 0 talking of nonsense, and moved to report progress. This was carried on tho voices and tho Houso rose at 1.34 a.m. "'