NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1238, 21 September 1911, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

Although he gave the House no details respecting the flotation of the £5,000,000 loan, which practically all the best financial papers in London criticised as a bad niece of financing, the Prime Minister in his spcech on Wednesday shed a little light upon the main fact, which is the rate of real interest on cash. The High Commissioner said the net return was £96 Gs. Id. It is easy to work out what this means in the case of the, bonds that are redeemed at the end of four years. The Government receives £90 Gs. Id. in cash, and pays out in interest £14 in four years, and then £100 in redemption. The difference, between £96 Gs. Id. and £100 is £3 13s. lid. In four years, that is to sav, the Government will have paid £17 13s. lid. for the use for that period of £96 6s. Id. This works out at over 4$ per cent, on the cash actually received. How much of the loan is held for redemption '? Since 4J per cent, is a high net return to an investor in shortterm bonds, probably a good deal. We hope that before the session ends the Prime Minister will be given another opportunity to state all the facts about this really remarkable loan; but we have little hone that ho will depart from his practice oi' keeping the taxpayers in the dark as to the loans for which they are responsible and for which they pay so heavily.

A sinister little cable message in yesterday's paper that which recorded a statement by Mr. Fisher, the Prime Minister of Australia, to a trade unionist deputation. Mr. Fisher, we are told, "stated definitely that the Government's policy was to give preference to unionists; the Government would stand or fall by that. Preference would apply even to clerks seeking temporary employment in the Government service." It is not news that the Federal Government is prepared to sacrifice every public interest to the interest of its masters, tho trade unions, but stated thus baldly the doctrine to which it is attached will make nine New Zealanders out of ten gasp in amazement. This is the first time in modern history that the Government of a civilised nation has frankly admitted the right of an , organised minority to rule the majority. Wc noted recently the announcement of the Acting-Minister for Defence that in buying supplies for the army the Government would give preference to firms "adhering to union rates and conditions," even if it cost more, over firms unfriendly to the trade unionist .policy. A year ago »thc unions complained that they were not being paid the price of their support; but, as the Australasian _ has noted, that complaint can no longer be made: "Mr. Hughes and Mr. Tudor powerfully supported them in the recent strike in Queensland; Mr. O'Malley has magnificently rewardeel them by raising, on his own responsibility, the minimum wage paid in the principal spending Department of Government; Senator M'Gregor and Mr. Fisher have now intimated that no firm not 'adhering to union rates and conditions' need bother to tender for public contracts. It is an impressive record for 16 months of office. What the state of affairs will be in another year and a half it is disquieting to think. The unions have tasted blood, and the nearer the elections approach the more they will require. It is difficult to believe that the nation will not rise up against this extreme application of the policy of "spoils to the victors."

The search for a "safe" electorate for the Attorney-General does not appear to be so simple an undertaking as some of the admirers of the Leader of the Upper House imagined. Several weeks have elapsed since the search began, and although quite an unusual number of Government members have announced their intention not to seek re-elec-tion, Sir_ John Findlay has not rushed _ into the - openings thus left him, and still dallies. Recently it was announced that he was to address a meeting or deliver a lecture or sonicthing of the kind at EHhn.ni, which was taken to be confirmatory of the rumour that lie had made up his mind to take the plunge and contest fchc-Egmont electorate against Mr. Divf.. The farming community who form a large section of the electors of Egmont, however, were not at all enthusiastic over the proposal. Indeed, they are said to have made it very clear that if cither of the two safc-scat-hunting members of the Cabinet was to be thrust on Egmont they would much prefer that_ it should be the Minister for Agriculture, rather than the Attorney-General. Meanwhile people are still wondering why cither of these gentlemen should go so far away from their headquarters. Why not venture 011 a Wellington seat?

There has been some comment'on the maiden speech of the member for Ohristchurch North, delivered during the Fiuancial Debate on Tuesday

evening. It was cxpectcd that an old campaigner like the reverend gentleman would lie lnw until he had picked np a few ideas concerning the political questions of the moment. But instead of doing so ho made an early plunge, which, while affording an excellent opportunity for displaying his undoubted gifts of rhetoric and a quite amazing vocabulary of disparaging epithets,, left the somewhat unpleasant impression that effect, rather than an accurate presentation of facts, was the chief purpose in view. It is not in very good taste, nor is it good tactics, for a young member in his first important speecli to set himself up as a party scold. No doubt Mr. Isitt will find it difficult to set aside the habits of a lifetime of platform work, but the choice collection of abusive epithets and flashy phrases which he has garnered in his campaigns against the liquor interest-, and which in their time have won the approval of many Prohibition gatherings, will need to be more_ carefully handled when brought into requisition in Parliament. _ Me. Isitt, we are sure,.does not wish to be regarded as an irresponsible party swashbuckler famous only for his extravagant language and a class of humour that can win him no higher reputation than that of a sort of political "comic cuts."

A question of very great importance was raised in the House of llepresentatives yesterday by Mr. Lang, but attracted little attention. The member for Manukau pointed out that certain returns ordered by the House,, and containing information asked for by members, had not been supplied. These returns were ordered two years ago, and could easily have been placed before the House last session, if not sooner, and yet the Government had not even now complied with the orders of _ Parliament. The matter is one of importance, not merely on account of the information thus kept back from the public, but because of the principle involved. When Parliament orders that information shall be supplied by Ministers it is a direct reflection on the authority of Parliament if Ministers neglect to comply with the instructions given them. It is a difficult enough matter to induce Ministers to afford the opportunity to members to bring forward motions for returns containing information 011 public questions, and when such motions are carried Parliament should uphold its own dignity and assert its powers to see that they arc complied with. Unfortunately the dignity and the of Parliament arc not matters which members trouble very much about nowadays.