New Britain herald., 1914-07-27
Suggestions For Reforming House of
 Commons.

Commons.
 P, Springfield Republican, In the suggestions recently made by | MT. Asquith for the reform of pro- cedure in the house of commons two considerations were given special
 emphasis the saving of time and a
 more adequate provision for action upon the bills of private members,
 members, that is to say, who are not l in the cabinet or whose proposals are 1 not taken up by the cabinet and pressed as government bills. The helplessness of the individual mem- bers has been a source of very bitter 1 complaint of late, and the case has
 been getting steadily worse because for various reasons parliament gets
 less done and there is less time at the disposal of private members. In about eighty-five. per cent. of the sittings
 government business has precedence, and even this is not enough for thor ough discussion of all the great bills.
 What time is left has to be shared
 among the many members who have
 pet bills to present and there is never
 enough to go around.
 At present this situation is met as
 we'll as may be by lot. At the begin
 ming of a session members who have
 bills to introduce send in their names and after, precedence has been determined by lot takes the earliest time available, part of some Friday being left for tins purpose. To pass through its second reading bill that is lucky in it's lottery drawing is not very difficult if the house is flaw
 orably disposed, but the remaining stages, including the committee stage in the house, are difficult to arrange for unless the government yields some of its time, and this the govern ment is rarely disposed to do. A dozen or more such bills are usually lucky enough to get through in the course of a year, but they are usually noncontentious measures, because determined hostility on the part of even a few is almost certain to block it at some stage or other.
 To increase the opportunities of private members it is necessary to provide more. time and the prime minister's proposal is to find time by eliminating discussion at the first reading of bills. The first reading is in any case formality, the fight, if
 
 second reading. There is some req son. therefore, apart from the urgent need for saving time in the proposal to reduce discussion of a measure at its first reading to two speeches, one for and one against. With able rep resentation that should sufficiently outline the case, and miscellaneous discussion at that stage is apt to be scattering. If the reform could re- duce the opportunity of private mem bers to be heard, it would for com pensation yield them more time to get their bills passed.
 But of even more consequence is the proposal that the order of the house should be so amended that any bill on which substantiated progress had been made should be carried over to the next session, so that the tedious first steps would not have to be re- peated; to many a private member his efforts at getting bill through have seemed like Penelope weaving I her garment and unrayeling 1t as fast as done. Much waste would be pre- vented by this reform, the propriety of which is specially apparent in the case of the numerous bills which mo- body opposes. but which have no i chance because they are crowded out I by other business. MT. Asquith has a great reputation as parliamentarian, | some observers ranking him even above Gladstone in this respect, and | the. liberals tenure Of office is not | so secure that he can be accused of 1 party motives in proposing the short ening of debate. Recommendations | from that quarter are sure of respectful attention, though the house ' of commons may be in no haste to | reform it's practice.