MR. McGILLIGAN said that it was valuable to remember the history of the Colonial Laws Validity Act. Originally it had extended the powers of Colonial Legislatures, but now it was a restriction upon the powers of Dominion Parliaments, and its retention was an anomalous anachronism. He thought that the Conference should take the line that uniformity should be secured by reciprocal Statutes based on consultation and agreement - the principle of the Report of 1926. The Colonial Laws Validity Act was now irreconcilable with the constitutional practice of the Commonwealth and held the threat of contingent invalidity over every Dominion Statute. Half-hearted revision of this measure would carry them nowhere. Rather than appeal to the Parliament at Westminster for the purpose of amending Dominion Constitutions, he would prefer to put up with any procedure however cumbersome which the amendment of those Constitutions by the Dominion Parliaments entailed. He said that to confer powers of legislation upon the Parliament at Westminster would be a renunciation of the sovereignty of the Parliaments of the Dominions. He thought that the practical utility of uniformity in respect of certain matters could be secured by taking apart the existing machinery and re-establishing it in a way that would conserve Dominion sovereignty. For instance, any departure from uniformity in respect of the matters which had been referred to as fundamental might be made to depend upon the concurrent passage of legislation in every Parliament of the Commonwealth. In conclusion, Mr. McGilligan suggested that the discussion might usefully start with the consideration of the third of the categories defined by Sir William Jowitt.