Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 8 April 1926, Page 2

Decided views against anything in the nature of government by Order-in-Council are expressed in the annual report of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce. “Since the war,” the reportstates, “there has been a tendency to perpetuate a phase of legislation that was nocositated in those critical times, i.e.. legislation by ()nlor-in-Council. It. was essential then for Ministers of the Crown to he given a power lo act on their own discretion where it was impossible to refer to Parliament assembled, and it was in the public interest that prompt act ion should he taken to meet the situation. In regard to Customs matters, the (lumping and similar provisions necessitated some such power being given. and tittle objeciipii could be raised where the power was exercised judiciously and reasonably. Whenever the power has been exercised Ministers have invariably taken the first opportunity of bringing it before Parliament when it has met together and having their action confirmed. Howe'er, there are many eases where proposals are made to enact legislation under which a. Minister is given discretionary power to make deer-ions upon matters which could well he left for discussion by Parliament, and • n those cases Chambers of Commerce can perform a useful service lor the business community by keeping a dose watch on new legislation, especially of a commercial character, to see tl>a* any granting of discretionary powe - s is confined only to those cases "h * v it is essential to the pro|>er working of the statute, concerned, ami it s in the public* interest for such power to Ik* granted. Protests have been recorded through the Associated ChainIters against legislation that delegated to a Minister a power to make important regulations subsidiary to Acts of Parliament—that power it is felt should he retained by Parliament itself. and Chambers of Commerce, cannot in general support the principle of government by Order-in-Coutieil.”