LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 56, 30 November 1918, Page 3

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS

POSTPONEMENT MEASURE DISCUSSED. Sir Francis Bell, speaking in tho Legislative Council on Thursday on the Legislative Council Amendment Bill, said that tho Legislative Council Act, passed in 191t, provided that appointments to tho Council should be made on the elective principle. Owing to tho war it had been found necessary from time to time to postpone the date upon which the Act should come into operation. In 1910 it was decided that the Act should bo made operative on January 1, 1920, and that the date on which appointments should expire should be January 1, 1921. Unless an alteration were made in the law a general election could not take place before the end of 1919. He knew that tho Hon. Sir William Hall-Jones would object to that very strongly, but it would he seen that if the Government leaders wont to England it would be impossible to hold an election before the date he. had mentioned.

Sir William Hall-Jones: Let them go liko Lloyd George, witli the mandate of the people, behind them. Sir Francis Bell: How are you going to effect that now?

Sir William Hall-Jones: You should not havo put the election off as long ae you havo. No other part of tho Empire nan done that.

Continuing. Sir Francis Bell said it had been felt advisable that instead of going on postponing; dates every member appointed to the Council should sit for seven years, whether or not he had been appointed after tlie coming into ,operation of the Act. The Bill before the Council provided that the Legislative Council Act should commence on a date to be fixed by the Governor-in-Council, that date to be not less than one year from the issue of the Gazette containing the Order-in-Council.

Tho Hon. W. Enrnshaw: That is a most indefinite date. Sir Francis Bell added that despite what might happen at a general election the Act would remain on tho Statutebook, and any Government would have tho right tO'b'rinsr it into operation. He hoped that the Massoy Administration would remain in powrr after the disruption of the National Government, so that they might be the means of putting the Act into force. The position as it stood at present was not in accord with the rights and dignity of the Council, and that was the reason why ho had proposed the Amendment Bill.

The. non. Sir William Hall-Jones said it wns a pity that there had been so many postponements in connection with the coming into operation of the Legislative Council Act., He thought tho Act should come into operation on a definite date.

Tho Hon. J. T. Paul said it seemed that although many of them had fought hard for the Legislative Council Act tho effect of the new proposals of- the Government would boHo' kill the Act. A section of the Reform Party was becoming lukewarm' on the question- of Legislative Council reform. lie suggested that when a .referendum was taken on the liquor issue the people of-the country should also be asleep to express an opinion as to whether tlie Legislative Council Adi should come into force. There would be a majority in its favour. Sir Francis Bell: What a dignified procedure, to mix this up with liquor! Mr. Paul: "If there are anv questions upon which tho leaders of the country cannot, agree- there is no harm in asking tho pooplo to give their opinion on three or four of them at tho one time." Tlie nominative principle was not satisfactory. Labour was not sufficiently represented in the Council; in fact, its representation was lower than it had been at any time siucn tho great Liberal revival in the 'nineties. He hoped that his prophecy would be incorrect, and that the Act would come into oneration. Tho only way out of the difficulty was tn submit the matter to a referendum of the peonlo to ascertain from them whether the Act should come into force or not.

The Hon. G. .Tones onnnse<l thfl idea of an elective Council, because ho did not wish to see two elective legislative bodies which might cross one another's path at some time or. other.

The Hon. "j. G. W. Aitken' said the real question to consider was whether they nprppd in the Bill as it stood lipfqre them. The Eeform and Liberal Parties had done the right thing in conlosnntr, and the Dominion should be repre'-eiifod at the Peace Conference. That boing this wise, tlie hvo leaders fhonld prnppiv] to F.ntlarid as ?"on as possible. Sir William Hall-Jones had suggested that they should <?o with the mandate of tho country behind them.- If more time were available that would perhaps be a good thing, but New Zealand was so situated that no other course was available than that tl'e leaders should go as ns possible. He maintained that the provisions of tlie Bill regnrrlinsr the cominpr into operation of the Legislative Council .Act were intended to keep the Act alive, and not to kill it. • The' TTpji. W. fiiptuvrtetl tlie remarks of Ulr. Paul on the point of the representation o.f Labour in tho Council. Tb« Wrni. A. F., Hinrlvo thonjrlit Hint, tlie Bill should be passed. a« he did not believe it w»s intended to kill the Legislative Council Act. No Intention to Kill the Act. Sir Francis Bell, in reply, said he had proposed the measure, as lie had had in mind the dignity of the Council. He had been accused by Mr. Paul of being the spokesman of others who wanted to destroy the Legislative Council Act, but ho desired to emphasise, that he would not be guilty of suc'i discreditable conduct. It seemed to him that those who formerly supported him in the pas°ing of the first measure were now deserting him. Hβ could assure the Council that there was no intention of killing the Legislative Council Act. Tlfe Bill was then committed, and after certain technical amendments had been made at the suggestion of the StatutesRevision Committee it was reported, read the third time, and passed.