The Dominion. FRIDAY, JULY 8, 1910. HOW TO FRAME A POLICY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 863, 8 July 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, JULY 8, 1910. HOW TO FRAME A POLICY.

All unconsciously, the member for Wanganui threw a flood of light yesterday upon the conception of political ethics held by the average supporter of the Government. Once upon a. time, he explained—this presumably was in the days when he was a simple citizen, unpolished by the refining and uplifting influence of Parliament—ho thought that the Address-in-Keply debate was quite unnecessary. "Subsequently, however," to quote his own statement of his position, "he began to think that the debate might be used by the Government as a feeler to get an indication of the views of members on varisubjects. In this way," lie explained, "the Government would be able to frame its policy before bringing down the Financial Statement. He could sec that if members did not have an opportunity of expressing their views it was possible that the Govcrnmcnt might bring down a policy which was not satisfactory to its own supporters." It had better he explained that Me. Hogan was speaking in all seriousness, that thing was further from his intention than satire, and that neither lie nor any of his fellow Ministerialists suspected for a moment that 11 an sard was being enriched by a statement to which no parallel can possibly be found in_ the history of Parliamentary institutions. When this is Mil. Hogan's and his friends' conception of the duty of a Ministry it is no longer necessary to feel surprised at the queer things that members do at the PimiE Minister's bidding. We others can only look on and envy a state of mind that secures its possessor against the trouble, and anxiety which logic, consistency, ideas, and the lure of truth tiring in those who have not attained the painless calm of Mr. Hogan and his friends.

The Wai;d Government, we believe, has the distinction of being the only Government in the world which shapes its .policy entirely in accordance with the party needs of the moment. In reply it may be urged, of course, that there is nothing new in that fact—that the whole world— or rather that part of the world which interests itself in our doings— has known for years that the "Liberal" party in Mew Zealand is the beacon light of the older nations stumbling ' through the darkness. One day even the British Government, Mu. Hogan may say, will abandon its- antiquated practice of deciding upon a policy and sticking to it. Wc can well understand that to the gentlemen who obediently vote as the Prime Minister tells them, even 'when by doing so they reverse the opinions they have _ already expressed, there is something offensive in the idea that a Prime Minister, having laid clown his policy, should be so self-opinionated as to resign in the event of defeat. What—we can hear them exclaim—what is to become of the Constitution, what hope can there bo of stability, if Prime Ministers have so little respect for their salary and so_ intolerably bigoted a notion of their dignity as to be ready to throw up their exalted offices just because in framing their policy they fail to guess what is likely to be approved by the House? And it is not only dangerous and offensive—these good gentlemen _ will continue—but incredibly stupid to decide on a policy beforehand, with all the chances of deciding wrong, when by the simple expedient ot waiting till everyone 'has spoken one can arrange just the policy that is wanted. A shopkeeper docs not send out a delivery van loaded with arbitrary parcels which he thinks his customers will be wise to accept; not he. He sends his man round with a little book to take the orders. How much easier it would be for Mit. Asqitith, should, the next election bring forth a majority in the House in favour of TarifE Reform, if he were to say nothing until everybody has spoken and were then to introduce a Tariff Reform Budget. Why, he could keep his billet for years if lie would only get up to date. And, what is still more pleasant to reflect upon, ho would not expose his Mr. Hogans to the risks that dissolutions •and fresh elections contain for the M.P. The whole question is an extremely interesting one, and it will be a thousand pities if the Prime Minister does not take the earliest opportunity of speaking upon the principles of policy-making. His expert-view would not only be interesting to the House and to the country, but would also be of great practical value to the statesmen of older lands.