PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1812, 26 July 1913, Page 6

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

UPPER HOUSE REFORM.

THE COPYRIGHT BILL AND PENSIONS.

MR. RUSSELL'S PAST.

SCATHING SPEECH BY THE PREMIER.

The Legislative Council met at 2.30 p.m. The Hon. W. C; F. CARNCEOSS resumed the debate on the second reading of the Legislative Council Bill. He said he wished at the outset to dissociate himself from those who accused tho Government of insincerity in bringing down this Bill;' He believed the Government were sincere in their' desire to pass the Bill, but he also believed that they were sincere in a wrong cause. The tendency on tho part of some members to charge the Government with insincerity was a glimmering of thoso party tactics with which they had been made familiar in another place. This could be tcken as a foretaste of tho party factions that ■would bo created if the Council wero to be .elected. But it seemed to him that • tho Government were emulating the labour of Frankenstein—creating a monster which would turn and rend them. Ho was sorry that he could not respond to the Hon. Mr. Bell's conciliatory speech. There must be, from his point of view, a sharp line of cleavage on the 'main •principle: of the Bill, and he regretted that ho could not support it. Nor cculd fie agree with Mr. Sinclair's proposal • that part of the Council should be elected, and part nominated. If the method of choice by popular election was the best method, was there any reason why the whole. Council should not be elected ? He would not like to sit in a Houso that was partly elected and partly nominated. Caste distinctions would be sure to grow up in a Chamber composed partly of members bound Ly party pledges and partly of members who wero not, The Present Council..

It was said somewhat ungenerously that 'members of the Council were now fight.'ing the Bill from motives of self-interest. 'But some members realised that many cf them had had their innings in the Coun,cil, and that they would not in any event /be re-appointed. His own conclusion that ihe must vote against the Bill, and-against >an Elective Upper Chamber, had been ■arrived it solely a3 the result of his own .reading.' One of his reasons for objecting to the elective principlo was that the iinire and turmoil of an election fight must for ever debar many of our wisest men from entering the Council. The only objection that had ever been raised to the present Council wns that certain of the appointments mailo were unsatisfactory. But would it be possible ever to .have appointments that would please everybody? In the House of Representatives man were frequently elected in preference to othjer men very much their superior!*, and if that sort of thing went on in the Elective Chamber liow could it bo prevented in the Council? And if there were elections for the Council, tho wisest and most useful men would certainly not be put into the Council. 'He supported the nominative principle because he was convinced that it was the bast for the Council, and the only possible 6y3tem for any useful secondary Chamber. He declared that the House was not a party Chatnbsr, and it could not be truthfully a-vid that the Council did not receive the legislation from the Massey Government in the same dispassionate spirit as it had previously received legislation from the predecessors of the present Government. . ....■'

The "Idle Cry." Th'e cry for reform of the Council was simply, an jdlo cry by people who did not understand the question at all. Many candidates for tho Lower House at last election had given pledges that they would favour reform of the Council, but these pledges wore very lightly givenmere make-weights put into their programmes. Not a single member of the House had been elected because of his advocacy of reform of the Council. The real reason for the cry for reform was that for a number of years. all the nominations to the Council had come from one side of the House only, and this defect was now being corrected. The agitation would disappear entirely when the parties in the Council were more evenly balanced. There was no strong pnblio opinion in favour of Change; if the people cried out for reform the Council would have to give in, but the people did not want the dhange. It was true that the Government had embodied reform of the Council in their programme, but it was not true that the Government had got into power on that plank. They tod got into power on only one plank— and that plank wns the freehold. It was well understood that the Government .would not introduce proportional representation into fch» electoral law for the Lower House until it had been tried on the Council. Hβ protested, that tho Council ought not to be used in- this way as the tools for experiment. What the Government proposed was to sacrifice the Council in response to an ignorant cry for so-called "reform." "The other place," he said, "proposes to throw us to the wolves in order to make their own escape from reform." He assured tho Government that if they succeeded in passing tho measure they would early regret having done so. There were not wanting, signs which made it appear absolutely necessary that the Council should be. kept a nominative body.

FRANCHISE OBJECTION. THE PROPERTY QUALIFICATION? Tho Hon. S, THORNE-GEORGE said the Bill had been : improved so much by the postponement last year that ho thought it w.oulil bo wi£O to give the franier of tho Bill still another year to. consider it, "in order that next year he might bring down a perfect Bill. Although personally ho believed in tho nominative system he realised that tho people of the Dominion asked that all legislative chambers should to elective, and he had come to tho conclusion that the Council must soon bo an elective Chamber. But ho certainly never would vote for tho Council being inado elective unless the franchise were made somewhat different from that required for elections to the Lower House. He would ask tho Minister to fix a small property qualification for voters in Council elections. Let the amount-of property to be held be as small as might Ik, but let there be some difference between the franchises for tho two Chambers. It would be better to sin against the theory than against the practice of democracy. He had changed iuis opinions about proportional representation, and now he was opposed to it. The inevitable result of the introduction of it would be that candidates, mostly unknown to the voters, would be returned by tickets. These tickets would bo prepared only by organisations which existed mainly in the towns, and the towns would entirely swamp the country. Ho thought it extraordinary too that the Government should propose to reserve the right to nominate three Natives, especially since tho Government had declared fhat their object was to make the law the same for Natives and Europeans. He did not approve of the limitation of .powers of the Council in regard to Money Bills and Public Bills. The effect of the scheme in the Bill would be to set up a iini-cameral Legislature with all the exof a bi-cameral one, for the powers of the Lower Houso were absolute according to tlie Bill. The Council, ho tl'ought, ought to have some right of veto, otherwise it was useless. Ho had not yet decided how ho would vote on the Bill,' but he would use his vote to make tw> Will belter if ho could. Ho would not vote to pass the Bill into law in its u-i«*nt form. Ho would like to seo a s-ii'ill property qualification attached to tli" Council franchise, and tho system of nroisortional representation dropped; ilo «-otild vote for the second reading in or,.!>«r that tho Bill might be sent to a ji.lect Committee..

The debate was adjourned on the motion of tho Hon. W. Earnshaw. GOVERNMENT BILLS.. The Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill (the Hon. H. D. Bell) and tho Amendments Incorporation Bill (the Hon. H. D. Bell) were read a second timo without debate. The Council rose at 1.30 p.m..