UNEXPECTED END

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26629, 27 November 1947, Page 6

UNEXPECTED END

Supply Regulations Debate

RECESS COMMITTEE TO REPORT

Parliamentary Reporter. WELLINGTON, Nov. 26. . / A surprise development in the House of Representatives to-day was the sudden termination of the discussion on the Supply Regulations Bill and the Emergency Regulations Continuance Bill following an allnight debate on the two measures, which were taken simultaneously. This was the result of an agreement between the Government and the Opposition whereby the two Bills and the schedules to them are to expire at the end of next year, and a Parliamentary Recess Committee is to be appointed to report to the House next session on which emergency regulations should be repealed and which should be retained. The debate was' continued throughout the early hours of to-day by a succession of Opposition speakers who expressed their opposition to the Supply Regulations Bill in the strongest possible terms permitted by the Standing Orders. As the morning advanced they were frequently called to order for tedious repetition.

The first closure of the session was applied to terminate the second reading debate, and after a break for breakfast, the House resumed to proceed with the committee stage of the Bills, Shortly before the normal time for the luncheon adjournment progress was reported, and on resuming this afternoon the terms of the agreement were announced. A condition was that the Bills be put through without further discussion. This was done and the House then proceeded to discuss the Fair Rents Amendment Bill, which was the last Bill on the Order Paper. Move Towards Socialism Mr W. S. Goosman (Oppn., Piako) said the Supply Regulations Bill was one of the biggest steps the Government had taken in its policy of ultimate Socialism. The measure would be looked on with a lot of suspicion as it was in charge of the Minister of Supply. The Bill gave the Minister the power he wanted to have over the people of New Zealand. Mr Harker (Oppn., Hawke's Bay) said not one word had been said by the Minister of Supply or the Prime Minister to justify the passing of regulations before Parliament could be called together to deal with whatever situation arose. If it were necessary to have some regulations then at least they should be supported by a resolution adopting them, and if they were not adopted by the House within 14 days after they were laid on the table they should lapse. At 5.5 a.m., when Mr T. P. Shand (Oppn., Marlborough) was speaking, Mr Speaker warned members thatfhe debate was developing into tedious repetition. A similar warning was given later in the morning by the Chairman of Committees, Mr C. L. Carr (Govt., Timaru), who was temporarily in the chair. ) Closure Applied

1 would give all the power that wai required.

Powers Attacked Mr F. W. Doidge (Oppn., Tauranga) said the Minister’s willingness to remove the sub-clause did not mean that the Bill would be no longer offensive to the Opposition and the country as a whole. The Minister would. still have powers under other sections of the Bill to usurp the prerogative of Parliament The Government was taking greater powers than it had exercised during the war.Mr W. J. Broadfoot (Oppn., Waitomo) said that withdrawal of the sub-clause meant nothing because all the powers in it were now vested in the Governor-GeneraL The Bill was the road to serfdom. Mr Broadfoot withdrew his reference to serfdom at the request of the Chairman of Committees. ' The Prime Minister said the Opposition was giving no reasons for its hostility to the Bill but was substituting noise for reason and heat for noise, thinking that if they shouted long enough, “This must go,” the Bill would go—on to the Statute Book. The regulations which the Opposition opposed were ones which had been in force throughout the war years. Mr Fraser said that if the Labour Government wanted to put through any proposal it would not do it under the shelter of the regulations but openly in legislation before the House. The Opposition called for a division on the short title and on the second clause of the Bill, but both were retained by 37 votes. Clause 3, as amended by the Minister, was agreed to on the voices. Chance to Give Evidence After the luncheon adjournment Mr Nordmeyer said that the suggestion had been made that those who were particularly interested in the regulations should have an opportunity of giving evidence on ,them. That commended itself to him, and he had discussed it with the Prime Minister and the Leader of'the Opposition, with the result that a proposal had been advanced that the question of appointing a Recess Committee should be considered so that all the regulations could be referred to it to recommend which should be revoked and which should be retained.

At 7.25 a.m. the Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, moved that the question that the Bill be read a second time be now put. This was accepted by Mr Speaker, who, said that 21 members had spoken and that the debate was now yielding only endless repetition. The Opposition called for a division on, the Prime Minister’s motion to apply the closure, which was agreed to by 37 votes to 32. The Bill was then read a second time by a similar margin. Shortly before 8 a.m. an adjournment was taken until 10 a.m. to enable members to obtain breakfast and a shave. On resuming after the adjournment, the- House went into committee on the Bill. Eefore the discussion began, the Minister of Supply, Mr Nordmeyer, stated that the Government was prepared to modify the contentious clause 3 of the Bill by eliminating the subclause which authorised, among numerous other things, the acquisition of any property and the search of any premises. Mr Nordmeyer said that if rationing regulations were to be effective the right of search of premises should be retained, and the same applied to the regulations dealing with factory control. That was the real reason for the incorporation of those provisions in the Bill. It looked as if sub-clause 2 could Ipe dropped from clause 3, for sub-clause

This was acceptable to the Government party, he said, and it was also proposed that the Bills should continue for one year and' then expire at the end of next year. He felt that the proposal to set up a Recess Committee would commend itself to the House and the country. Mr Holland said that the Opposition was prepared to agree that regulations existing now should continue for 12 months on condition that the committee reported on them early next session. The Opposition’s agreement with these proposals did not mean that it agreed with the Bills, but that it would give an opportunity for them to be examined in the light of evidence from interested parties. Mr Fraser said the agreement covered both Bills and their schedules on condition that they went through. The Bills and schedules, which were amended accordingly, were then put through the remaining stages and passed.