15

1

are debaters' points.

2

DR. MICHENER: They basically provide a differ-

3

ent philosophy on the too different systems. In this case,

4

your point is valid.

5

MRS. FREEDLANDER: Mr. Chairman, isn't it true

6

that the unicameral legislation also was accompanied by

7

reference to the legislative council, which might have

8

improved the law with fewer loopholes?

9

DR. MICHENER: They came in simultaneously and

10

the question is, and it has been argued, how much is due

11

to unicameralism, as such, and how much is due to the

12

legislative council. This is mentioned, by the way —

13

MRS. FREEDLANDER: Yes.

14

THE CHAIRMAN: And of a nonpartisan nature;

15

that's another thing. It's very difficult to cancel it

16

out. I think that is a point well taken.

17

DR. MICHENER: Then the other argument made

18

against the second chamber is that there is no need for

19

review. The argument for review dates back historically

20

to when we didn't have legislative councils; that we have

21

bills drafted by legislators and by the executive department