BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

Hokitika Guardian, 30 March 1928, Page 3

BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

IN THE COMMONS. FRANCHISE BILL. (Australian Press Association <fc Sun.) LONDON. March 29. Asked what guarantees existed to prevent the- transfer of a privatelyowned cable and a wireless company forming an integral part of Imperial communication between Britain, the Dominions, and elsewhere, to foreign ownership and control, Mr Baldwin said he could not answer . for other Governments, but all cable and wireless services licenses granted by the British Government contained a provision that the license or any benefits therefrom was unsaleable without the Government’s consent. He could not say whether further safeguards were necessary till the Imperial wirelesscable conference reported. Mr Baldwin announced that a statement on the rubber inepliry would be made on April 4th. Fir AY. Joynson-Hicks, in moving the second reading of the Representation of the People Equal Franchise Bill, described it as a logical conclusion to a series of reforms. Beginning in 1932, this final reform would give representation to the people greater anil freer than any democratic country in the world. The time had come to say the age and restriction of woman votes should not be permanent. At present there were 230,000 plural votes, all for men with business as well as residential franchise. The bill would give a second to a number of women, but the aggregate plural voters would not exceed 420,000, only one and a-half per cent of the electorates. Nobody was entitled to vote more than twice at; any election. The new register will come into force in May. 1929. fulfilling Air Baldwin’s pledge that the new electors will be entitled to vote at the next election.

The main opposition to the bill arose on the ground that control of political power would be transferred to women, but the experience of the four last general elections justified the experiment of giving women the vote. He admitted that under the Dill there would latwo million more enfranchised women than men. In view of the startling mpiditv and progress of women m all businesses and professions, nol.ody couhl sav that women intellectually were unfit for a vote at the same age ■is men A women under thirty could bo a doctor, barrister and juror yet bad no vote, but of five and a-halt million women proposed to be entrancbised 1.700.0(10 would be over -50: 1,700,000 married between tbe ages o 21 and 30. and a million and a-ball unmarried earning their own livings, an d 390.000 unoccupied or unmarried under thirty. A section of the press Micmested that young women ought no to "Tie enfranchised because they would vote Labour. That was I*s«lc tW point. Conservatives in lMu 1884,

and 1918 did not consiuci electors would vote. Ah- P Snowden welcomed the lull, and said Labour always unanimously supported political equality ot the sexes. He regretted the rout,..nation of" some evils, especially dual qual.fica--I:lSir G. Cocke rill moved an amendment for the rejection of the bill on the ground that it gave women a permanent majority in the constituencies and did not follow tbe constitutional practice of accompanying an extension of tbe eletcorate with redistribution of seats bill. It was an injustice to men as » whole. There would he 12} million men voters and 14} million women and the latter would become tbe deteimining factor in the politics ot the country.