The Dominion. TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1913. A DEFECT IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1772, 10 June 1913, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1913. A DEFECT IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.

Though the final results of tho Australian Federal elections and the Referenda have not yet been declared, it is now practically certain that the proposed alterations in the Constitution will bo rejected; that the Liberals will have a majority of one in the House of Representatives; and that the Labour party will have 29 or 30 representatives i in tlie Senate as against Gor 7 Liberals. The political feituation which has,arisen out of tho appeal to the country is certainly a most extraordinary one, and no one .seems to know how, in the circumstances, the normal working of tho Parliamentary machinery can be restored without resort to procedure wasteful of time and money, and prejudicial to conduct of the ordinary affairs of the Commonwealth. The Australian newspapers which arrived by yesterday's mail contains numerous pronouncements from all points of view on the position of parties and the general outlook, but they are not of a very illuminating character. The Prime Minister (Mr. cannot bo expected to make an official statement as to his intentions until the complete results are made known, but Me. M'Dougall, one of the Labour Senators, says he does not expect that the Fisher Government will meet Parliament. When Mr. Fisher hands in his resignation the Gov-ernor-General will in the ordinary course send for tho Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Cook), who will form his Ministry, and in attempting to proceed with the business of the country he will soon find out exactly where he stands in relation to the House of Representatives and the Senate. The strictness of the discipline of the Labour party may be relied upon to prevent a Speaker being elected from their ranks, and this meana that as soon as the House has been properly constituted tho two parties will be exactly balanced with 37 members on each side, with a Liberal seated in the Speaker's chair.

A deadlock is regarded as inevitable, ai)d sooner or later a double dissolution must take place. Opinion is divided as to whether the crisis will occur immediately Parliament meets, or whether the Labour party in ordor to gain breathing time will permit the Liberals temporarily to perform the ordinary administrative functions of Government. It is truo that the Attorney-General (Mr. Hughes) appears to be taking up an uncompromising attitude. He does not positively state that his party will Mock Supply, but he does state that the other side cannot get it without the oonsent of tho Senate, and can only live upion the terms that tho Senate imposes. He adds that if both parties insist on carrying out the particular policy in which they believe, a deadlock can be the only outcome. On the other hand, tho fact that Mr. Fisher and his followers may be in a position to block all business does not lessen their own impotence from a constructive point of view. They can do nothing but obstruct their opponents, and probably the result of 'another appeal to the people would be even more favourable to them. Moreover, the country, according to present indications, has against the Labour party's policy so far as it has been embodied in tho Referenda proposals, which means that both as regards the' election of the House of Representatives and the Referenda they have met with serious rebuffs; but by a strange turn of events they have more than maintained their position in tho Senate. In view of all these facts, and the probability of a decisive defeat at the coming State elections in Now South Wales, it is quite possible that the Labour party may find it to their advantage to delay the dissolution of tho Federal Parliament W a while in the hope that their prospects may become a little more _ The present political impassi has naturally directed attention to a decidedly weak spot in the Federal Constitution, and the need for an amendment is already being discussed. Here we have two Houses with co-ordinate powers, both directly elected by the people on the same franchise, tho_ electors sending _ a Labour majority to one and a Liberal majority to the other. It is manifest that in such circumstances the legislative machinery will not work, and there is nothing to guarantee that a re-election, or even a 6eries of re-elections, will improve mattors. Disoussing this aspect of the situation, Mb. Beeby states that the election shows that if material • alterations are to be made in the Constitution they will not bo dictated by any particular party, but will, as in the case of the original Constitution, como from non-pa,rty conventions. • He points out that in the Senate one party has representation entirely beyond its numerical strength, and that if it was elected on a population basis the Labour party would only have something like a bare majority instead of overwhelming control in that Chamber. The remedy suggested by Mr. Beeby is some system of proportional representation, which, wliile protecting the rights of the majority, will give representation to different sections of the community. The weakness which has been disclosed in the Federal Constitution demands the attention of New Zealand politicians in view of the fact that the reform of our own Legislative Council is at present under consideration. Care should be taken to make it impossible. for such an unsatisfactory position as that which has arisen in Australia to be repeated in connection with our own Parliament. No doubt Mr. Massey and his 00l leagues aro closely watching the present critical juncture in the working of the Federal Constitution in order that, profiting by the mistakes of our neighbours, the legislative machinery of New Zealand may be made as perfect as possible.