INSURANCE BILL

Hokitika Guardian, 6 February 1930, Page 3

INSURANCE BILL

COMPROMISE IN BRITAIN

(United Press Association—By Electri< Telegraph.—Copyright.)

RUGBY, February 4

, Cabinet to-day, after a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party agreed to a compromise in the conflict which has arisen between the House of Commons and the House of Lords .over the Unemployment Insurance Bill. It is officially stated that at the meeting the Prime Minister set forth the situation created by the action of the House of Lords in insisting upon their amendment limiting the duratiop of the Rill to one . year. .He pointed out’ that there were three courses open, namely: To accept the Lords amendment, to resist ft, or to amend it. The meeting decided to act upon the Government’s .suggestion that the House of Lords’ amendment be amended to provide that the measure should continue in force until June JOtlp 19J3. The compromise implies the acceptance 'of the principle of limitation laid down by the House of Lords. The reason for limitations, as given in a paper issued to-day, are that the House of Lords consider that “before passing permanent legislation, it is desirable that an opportunity be afforded Parliamen for further examining questions relating tq unemployment insurance.” The matter will come up for debate in the House of Commons late tonight. In the event of a modification of the House of Lords’ amendment being passed, it is expected that the modification will be accepted by the House of Lords.

It appears that at a meeting of the Cabinet with the Parliamentary Labour Party, the compromise proposal was strongly resisted by a section of the Party, but counsels of moderation prevailed.

AIR M.acDONALD’S CRITICISM

LONDON, February 5

On the Insurance Bill, the members of . the House of Commons at 11.30 p.in.; considered the reason of the House of Lords for insisting on a time limit'.

Mr MacDonald, who was greeted with loud Labour cheers, said: It is necessary to be perfectly plain. Ihe amendments undoubtedly have raised the question of privilege, and it is an interference on the part of the House of Lords with our rights to determinhow the money of the country shall be spent. Hitherto, when the House of Commons has, debated privileged amendments, the House of Lords has agreed. To-night we are informed by the House Oi Lords that as long as tlie .Labour Government is in office, it will sit and criticise the Labour Bills as a subcommittee of the lory Party. I admit that the decision of the House of Lords has put tlie Government in a as it was meant to do. Mr MacDonald added“lf we drop' the Bill, or put it into the categoiy pf, -the Bills awaiting the operation. of the Parliament Act, the finance of the unemployment fupds would be bankrupt in from ten to fourteen days. We therefore, purpose to amend tlm House of Lords’ amendment, because is, absolutely unworkable. The administrative machinery can be hardly ip working ordqr in twelve months. The House of Lords,’ ’amendment proposes ,a time limit which would be finished before certain important changes in, the Bill come, into operation. Therefpr the Government propose .to substitute June ,1933, for March 1931, in the amendment, and thus to give time for the administrative and adjudicative machinery to come into operation. This will give time fpr the Act to be tried, as a reasonable experiment. Ilf revision is necessary, it can be undertaken in a clearer, calmer ptmospliere. For a double reason — First, the defence of the liberties and privileges of this House, and second because the. Act is a piece of practical workable legislation. I beg to mave a resolution amending the House of Lords amendment.

,Mr Churchill said the course Mr MacDonald outlined commended itself to the Opposition, hut in reference to the statement that the Labour Party could never expect fair treatment from the House of Lords, he pointed out that no minority party was ever treated with more generosity than the present Labour Government. The attack was made in a sense of grievance, but the Labour Party were really pampered darlings (Laughter). The House of Lords was entitled to reject the Bill.

After Sir H. Samuel and Mr Joseph Devlin had supported the Premier the amendment was carried.