The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1926. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES.

Hokitika Guardian, 23 February 1926, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1926. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES.

TnK attempt that is being made by the Labour Government of Xcw South Wales radically to alb’r the Constitution of the State has resulted ill the most hitter political light of recent years. In his determination to abolish the Legislative Council, comments the "Lyttelton Time*.'' Mr Lang has taken some drastic measures. Labour menders were told that their

obligations to the party must take precedence of any arrangements they had entered into to pair with members of the other parties, and three or lour of the Government’s supporters must now decide whether they shall place partv obligations before the honouring of promise* to certain colWiguos. The Premier claims that

there are no such things ns “pairs’’ in the Legislative Council, hut the '"cry I net that the leader of the Council has announced that no pairs will he allowed while the Abolition Bill is under co'nsidenation shows that, if there are no “pairs’’ in the same wav as there are in the Assembly, then’ are private arrangements, which hnv« exactly the same .effect. The way of the politician is hard, and Mr Lang is being attached light and left. The latest onset has placed the Labour Premier strictly on the defensive. Tt has been recalled that in the course cf a policy speech at Auburn the Labour leader staled: “When the electing vote for Labour candidates they vote tor what is here proposed and not for anything else as far as the existence of the next Parliament is concerned. I ask the electors, so far as the coming Parliament i.s concerned. to consider only the policy 1 have outlined to-night. That is what wo will try to do if returned to power no more and no less.” When asked if he had included the abolition of t h? Legislative Council in his statement of policy, Mr Bang could not say that he had, hut tried to convey the impression that his statement referred solely to the socialisation of industry. It cannot l.e contended that the

activities ol a Government must he scirjcily limited to measures outlined in any general statement of policy, hut that is a very different thing to using a majority in Parliament for the purpose of drastically changing the constitutional basis of the State. Constitutional issues, it can he reasonably claimed, should he the result of an miniistnkeable mandate from the electorate, and it is hecatt.se the Labour leader cannot show that he has such a mannte, or that the abolition of the Council was placed definitely before the elector*, that his action is opqa to

criticism. The value of tlie bicameral system is a matter for discussion, and there does not appear to Ire any reason why it should not he submitted to the electors when Parliament i< dissolved. The matter is not so important that it cannot wait. What has caused bitterness i.s the method adopted by the Labour Ministry, which seek, to tali' ail van tone of its position to effect important changes without affording the people an opportunity to express their opinions on the system of government uniter which they must live.