The Waikato Times. TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1937. CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS.

Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20268, 10 August 1937, Page 6

The Waikato Times. TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1937. CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS.

There is a group of what might be termed constitutional matters that may have some attention during the coming session, for it is important. One issue is the return to the three-year Parliament. The action of the Nationalist Government in extending the term was bitterly opposed by Labour, and during the election much was heard about the “stolen year.” In a recent reference to the matter Mr Savage was far from being definite. He stated that he did not so much object to the longer term as to the manner in which the alteration was made. But there can be not the slightest doubt that the party and its leaders gave a definite pledge that, if elected to ofllce, they would restore the shorter term. It would be a comparatively simple matter, and should be done in the coming session for the general election should be held next year, and there need he no uncertainty about such a fundamental thing. If, at the same time, Mr Savage should decide to hold a referendum regarding the parliamentary term that could be incorporated in the legislation. But it should be dearly stated that the plebiscite is to be taken next year, and on the question of a longer term, and not delayed until 1939 and then taken on the question of a shorter term. And, while the term of Parliament is being discussed, it would be as well to have the matter of the methods of election revised. For many years the Labour Party had in its statement of policy the scientific method of election known as proportional representation. It was only when it saw a prospect of obtaining office that this reform was unceremoniously jettisoned. It had been adopted, in the first place, largely as the result of the strong advocacy by the then member for Lyttelton, Mr J. McCombs, and it was 6trongly supported because it would provide for the election of a Parliament that would reflect, as completely as possible, the wishes of the people. It was regarded as an essential for any party claiming to be democratic. And it was abandoned for reasons of political expediency. Such an action seemed to indicate a very slight hold on political principle, and the Labour Party probably would gain support if it would face the question of the antiquated electoral laws now in operation, and make amendments that would at least prevent a majority in any electorate being compelled to accept as their member the representative of a comparatively small minority. There are so many minority members in the present House that it could he called a minority Parliament. Electoral laws that permit a candidate who has polled about one-third of the votes to represent the constituency must be hopelessly inadequate. It is the right of the majority to rule.

The third issue in the group is that of the Legislative Council. Labour for long favoured the abolition of that body, and the Prime Minister has stated that something may be done at a future date. In the meantime he is making new appointments, and no hint of pending legislation has been given. In this case there is legislation already on the Statute Book providing for the election of an Upper House under proportional representation. It was passed during Mr Massey’s term of office, and probably all that is necessary to bring it into operation is an Order-in-Council. It will be a strange thing if the first Labour Government rests content with the Upper House as at present constituted when, long ago, a leader whom the Labour supporters regarded as a confirmed Conservative made provision for its reform. These three matters are all of importance, and during the coming session there should be some clear indication of what the Government intends to do with regard to them.