THE SESSION AND THE CONFERENCE.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 515, 24 May 1909, Page 4

THE SESSION AND THE CONFERENCE.

It is not a little amusing to observe the ingenuity with which the Ministerialist pre?s is seeking to confuse tho situation in connection with the Pbime MiNiSTEK'a evident anxiety to have the work of Parliament BUBpended while, he attends the Naval Conference, "The question of Imperial defence"—so their favourite argument may ba condensed—"should bo set above party." Nobody, of course, has even .suggaatcd that it should not. But the -real-question in issuo ie a different question from that. The real question is: Do the necessities of Imperial defence require the postponement of ' the session? The real question is hot: Should Sib Joseph go Home? but: Should the important business of the" country be' postponed? Whether the Piume Minister should visit London is quite another question. The country may excusably think that its Parliamentary representatives should bo consulted before tho Executive pledges the country's credit to the extent of a possible four millions sterling; but the country is not equally concerned about tho Prime Minibteh's personal arrangements. It will not complain if the Prime Minister goes to London. It will not complain if he sends a proxy. .But it will moot.assuredly express its strong disapproval ,if the personal necessities of the head of the Government are made to interfere with the transaction of Parliamentary business. It was ingenious on tho Fbiub Minis-

•mil's part, no douht/to place himself in Parliament's hands. We should bo more deeply impressed wiUi his recognition of Parliament's authority were it not (hat he chose to act on hie own authority a few weckfl ago in a matter affecting Parliament's authority, or were it not that his object in consulting Parliament is to have arrangements made that will "suit his convenience at the expense of tho country's interests, and arrangements which will amount to a further subordination of Parliament to the Executive's 'convenience. The public is not so thick-witted that it cannot see that tho question is: -Why, in any case, should the normal sessional arrangements bo upset ? What necessity, of any kind, is thore for the'eourse that tho Government ia anxious to have adopted? The chief. Ministerialist newspapers arc cariful to avoid answering these questions. They quote the. precedont of 1897. They suppress the later precedent of 100", when ,thc session went on as usual despite the absence of the then Prime Minister. In oome of tho lesser Ministerialist journals; however, we get an admission of the reasons for the Government's anxiety to postpone Iho Bossion. The Oamaru Mail, for example, says that "every Minietcr must be ih his placQ and in tho best fighting trim whon these matters arc hoforo Parliament," because "it would not, at this juncture, bo safo to repeat tho exporiraont which answered so well in Mr. Seddon's time." We do not suppose that our'southern contemporary moans anything so ridiculous aa that it is the safety of the country that would bo endangered if the precedent of 1902 were followed. What it means, of course, is that, in its opinion, tho safoty of tho Liberals' patty plans may bo jeopardised if tho session proceeds with the PiuifE Minister away. This boing so the quostion really at issue is whother tho interests of the country or the interests of tho Government party are to reccivo first consideration, So far- as* tho country and Parliament are concerned, there is no noefcssary rolation whatever botween the Naval Conference and tho session. Whether Sir Joseph Ward, attends the Conforonco in porson, or by a well-instructod proxy, wo are sure New Zoaland will bo woll represented. ,B\\t wo utterly fail to see why New Zealand's representation at the Conference should interfere with, the transaction, at tho normal time, of. Now Zealand's important domestic businesß.