A MUDDLED ACT

Hokitika Guardian, 9 October 1929, Page 6

A MUDDLED ACT

SHOPS AND OFFICES. INQUIRY DURING RECESS WELLINGTON, Oct. 7. ' Gratification at the fact that the Shops and Offices Act was to he referred to a lion-departmental committee for investigation during the recess was expressed by Mr Fraser, Labor member for Wellington Central, in the House of Representatives to-night. The Bill, he said, was long overdue for amendment.

The Labour Bills Committee reported that some evidence had been taken, but in view of the statement by the Minister of Labor that Shops and Offices Act was to be investigated during the recess the committee recommended that the Amending Bill be not allowed to proceed. Mr Fraser said the committee had come to the conclusion that the question was too big to be disposed of this session. He suggested that the Laboui Bills Committee of the House was admirably suited for investigation of this Act. That committee should be empowered to sit during the recess and report to Parliament next session. Mr Wright (Welington Suburbs) said he never knew an Act to be in such a hopeless muddle as the Shops and Offices Act. One man was not allowed to sell tobacco and another could not sell treacle. The whole thing needed an overhaul and a fresh start. Shops that sold tobacco were supposed to shut at seven, but now a machine had been invented which would sell cigarettes at any time. One Magistrate had ruled that it was a shop, and another that it wasn’t. All that a man had to do was to place a machine outside his shop and sell at any hour.

The Minister of Labour (the Hon W. A. Veitch) : He can’t do that. Mr Wright : 1 beg your pardon, but he can. A Wellington magistrate said this machine was a shop and a Dunedin magistrate said it was not. I believe the last judgment stands, as it has not been appealed against. 1 would suggest that this Act should not be referred to a Select Committee. When an Act is in such condition as this one no such committee should make the investigation. Drastic a iteration of the Act is necessary. Mr Veitch: No Government is entitled to ignore Parliament in a matter of legislation. Mr Wright :I wish the Minister a happy time with it. The Minister of Justice (the Hon. T . M. Wilford) said he thought the personnel of the Labour Bills Committee, plus an officer of the’ Crown Law Office, would deal with the Act in admirable fashion. Such a committee would have no right to bring down legislation, but could make recommendations. “Surely it. is the responsibility, of the Government to bring down legislation,” said Mr Jones (Mid-Canter-, bury). “It looks to me as though some of the Minister’s own party have turned against him on this Bill and referred the matter back to the House.”

Mr S. G. Smith chairman of the Labour Bills Committee: That is not correct. ■ The Minister of Labour: Nothing of the sort. Mr Jones: Well this was brought down by the Government as “real Prime Canterbury,” and here it is back with an adverse report. The Minister of Labour raised a loud laugh at the expense of Mr Jones by informing the House that the Bill under review was not introduced by the Government but by the Labour member for Wellington South. . Mr Jones: Well I was not aware of it (renewed laughter), but it only gives greater force to my argument. I may say we are in an extraordinary position when the Government is not prepared to accept the responsibility for legislation. Mr Howard (Christchurch South) said he agreed that a peculiar position had arisen, because he had heard the member for Mid-Canterbury urging that a Bill be referred to a committee for consideration. Mr Jones: That is different altogether. (Laughter).

Mr Howard: Oh of course! Then we have the member for Wellington Suburbs telling us that the Act is in a hopeless muddle, yet this Government has only just left' the Treasury benches. They left that Act in a hopeless muddle. (Laughter). There are other Acts also in a hopeless muddle. The committee’s report was adopted.