HOUSE OF LORDS

Hokitika Guardian, 5 February 1930, Page 3

HOUSE OF LORDS

INSURANCE BILL

[United Press Association. —By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.]

LONDON, February 3

Opposition benches in the blouse of Lords were more crowded tliaii they have been since the Parliament Bill struggte on January 19th for the consideration of the Insurance Bill. Ah urgent whip had been sent out, in response to which Peers were present who have not attended the House for years.

The Peeresses’ Gallery was filled, and many iiieiiibers of the House of Commons were at the bar of tbe House. Tbe atmosphere was most intense when Lord Parmoor introduced the subject. He expressed the opinion that there was no, need for any excited statements about it crisis, The House of Lords was competent to suggest amendments to bills within certain limits, but when the Speaker ruled that these were a breach of the House of Commons’ privilege, and when the Commons rejected them by a large majority, then other considerations arose. He said Lord Salisbury had described the House of Lords’ action as an assertion, of anxiety concerning extra burdens being put oil taxpayers. These were considerations Which the constitutional, practice and the Statute had committed to the House of Commons for a filial decision.

Lord Salisbury said that they were not merely there to make recommendations. He did accept the plea of breach of privilege,, which had been jised as a mere device to relieve the House of Commons of the duty of giving reasons for its action. Ha would not insist upon Lord Darling’s new clause, but this intensified the need for the Bill being only temporary.

Lord Budnnaster said he hoped the House would not take any action which would appear hostile to the claims of the poorpeople. He was not impressed by the argiiments for making this measure only temporary. If they were seeking for a collision with the House of Commons, that was not the moment to choose for a struggle. The House, whithout a division, decided not to insist on Lord Darling’s new clause.

The House, by 156 votes to 14 < however, resolved to insist on the insertion of a time limit to the Bill. After the House of Lords’ decision, a Cabinet meeting was held. It wa’s dec ded to call a special meeting, of the Parliamentary Labour Party fors February 4th, and submit the matter to the rank and file of the Labour members. 1 ..

Undoubtedly the Labour members are angry and a section are spoiling for a, fight with the' House of Lords, bjit the general impresson in the lobbies is that a compromise will be reached, thus saying the Unemployment Bill and preventing a crisis.

TALK OF GENERAL ELECTION

LONDON, February 4

The House of Lords’ amendmerd comes again before the House of Commons to-night. If again the House deletes the time limit, it will be most serious challenge to the House of, Lords, but there is reason to believe that the House of Lords will accept a compromise. A gesture from the Government is likely to be the substitution of a three years limit instead of one year, and it is understood that Cabinet intend to put this proposal 'before the Party in order to avoid losing the Bill it is recognised that a struggle with the Housoe of Lords will necessitate an immediate dissolution. Doubtless the Labour Party’s meeting this morning will disclose a minority who are anxious to disagree, but the Ministers are persuaded they should have no difficulty in securing a, majority for their compromise. The fact of the Naval Conference is generally recognised as a strojig argument against a general election at the present time.