THE REFERENDUM AND THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 56, 30 November 1918, Page 9

THE REFERENDUM AND THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC

Sir,—The idea of a referendum in relation tQ the liquor traffic seems now to bo in the air. The first impetus was givtn to this movement by ths recomniendation of tho Efficiency Board. After some time tho matter was taken up by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, who declared their desire for some means of settling this "disturbing question onco for all/' Practical steps were takon to give effect lo the Efficiency Board's recommendation in the form of a petition for a referendum on the issue as recommended. This petition gave rise to others, which apparently assume that a referendum of some sort is to lie l>nt into operation, but they object lo the proposed issue and uulmut others as.being more in accordance with (ho ilemuuriitiu principle. Wo avo informed by the i'riino Minister that the result is , a very weighty body of petition to the Government asking for a referendum, but wo are not enlightened as to tho relative strength of the. different petitions. They are all lumped together as though they were all of tho same nature, ipresuimibly asking for , n settlemont of tho question "once for all." But it is clear that such is not tho case. The first petition was for a try on a "Yes ,, or "No" voto to settle the matter in a special manner. If the referendum failed the question would be left in its .present unsettled condition. The oilier petitions urn for a method of referendum that would settle tho matter, but by action directly opposed (o tho di'inocraliu principle. This I. shall endeavour lo show. It is an accepted tradition of ParliaI ment and a democratic axiom that important legislative proposals (unless in very urgent cases), before they are embodied in statute law, must bo submitted to tho decision of the electors at a general election, and thus receive the "iiiamlitte of tho electors." .Hut owing to the complexity of political "issues anil ■ their consequent mutually -disturbing

effect it is eomotimes impossible fov any largo body of electors to find a candidate who oven approximately represents tlieir views on all tho important legislative proposals put forward, and thus the ordinary machinery of Parliament is rendered incapable of responding to the people's will. In such cases the. principle of the referendum is applied to separate oil' somo one of the issues and clear the political atmosphere by giving the electors a direct vote on any one important question. Tho initiative in the matter may lie with the electors who by petition express a definite issue for a "les" or "No" vote on n question. Or it may lie with the Parliament, upon the presumed wish of the electors, to present such a proposal for the direct; vote- It really matters little how it arises provided the electors' democratic rights aro not infringed by denying them the right of veto. It matters not what form the issues assume provided the elector can vote "No" on every one of them if he so desires. If the referendum takes the form of submitting alternative proposals from which the elector must perforce choose one, this would settle the .matter "once for all," but the method violates the very first principle of democracy and is pure tyranny. 'The established and only democratic way to bring in .such a referendum is to first submit it to the electors for approval at a general election, ami so receive "their mandate" to proceed with it ill. the form submitted at the general election.—l am, etc.,