The Dominion. THURSDAY, MAT 3, 1912. MINISTERS ON THE STUMP.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1435, 9 May 1912, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, MAT 3, 1912. MINISTERS ON THE STUMP.

Theiie is really more of pathos than of anything else in the manner in which the members of the Ministry are whirling about the country. 'They opened their career with professions of an intense anxiety, to settle down to the work of administration, and although the nation is well awarq that they have no right to promise anything or undertake anything—lacking, as they do, either a majority in Parliament and the country or any right to occupy their present positions—they might have gained a little credit and some sympathy before being sent to the rightabout had they left all this petty business alone. Unfortunately for them, they had no plans—nothing more than vague professions—even so i far as administration is concerned. But they had to make some show of doing something, and the easiest thing is to race over the country at the taxpayers' expense, making speeches, attending banquets, and making themselves the laughing stock of all sensible people. There is not a Minister who can be relied upon to be present in Wellington for three days together. Perhaps wo ought not to complain, though: the country can easily pay the bill that Ministers are running up in their anxiety to have the time of their lives while they can.' Indeed, it is almost worth the nioney to enjoy watching the childish eagerness of Ministers to enjoy to the .utmost the delight of free, nay lucrative, travelling and of tho quaint homage of the little townships they visit. But how can these holiday-makers square their amusingly zestml use of their new privileges with their professions of anxiety to reform the bad administration which they extolled so whole-heartedly before they were photographed as tho Mackenzie Ministry ] For our own part, we do not think anything is suffering very much from their absurd behaviour; at anyratc, judging by their behaviour, they would not be likely to do very much good even if they "did attend to business at headquarters. It is all very ludicrous; but it is also not a little disturbing that the country should have been led so far from sound political standards as to make possible such absurd Ministerial peregrinations as these. Thu country is nearly recovered, of course, and it can laugh quite hearti ily at the Ministry.. In yesterday's I papers—it is not a very good exam-! pie for our purpose, but it is the! nearest—it was recorded that Mil. j Myers would leave for Christchurch i and Dunedin, that Mr. Lauren-son ! would go to Stratford to talk, that! Mn. Ell would go to Christclnirch to' he entertained at a social, that Ml!. H.un'an' was to attend a banquet at Otaut.iu. and that Mn. Euxton'j and Mr. Mackenzie were to attend ] a banquet at Fairlie. Banquets are reasonable things, although hardly necessary parts of government. The Ministers do not appear so absurd when -at the festjw board as when they arc pretending to administer,' their Departments. \Xi- have m> j little, respect for Mr. _Myki:s. but; really )ye caiiiiut pi-rccivi; that his inspfclion of tin; Addinglou workshops will help either him or the i countrv. Km- does it appear to us J iit all necessary that Mn. JiAi.T.KNSOX ! should personally go all the way to; Nelson to ''inspect/sites for workers'' homes!" Thare may bp—we do not jsay titare aie?rgeojjle .wjio .will »e^

licvn that by the mere fact of becoming a ftl iiiistt'r of the Crown a man becomes simultaneously endowed with tiie faculties of .several sorts of expert. Jf such people do exist at all they certainly do not exist in such numbers us tha members of the present Ministry would seem to ' imagine. We. have said that the nation can easily pay the bill for the Ministerial travelling, but we trust that somebody next session will move for a return dealing with the subject For that will help to kill \hv ludicrous but pernicious idea that it is a proper tiling for Ministers to draw big salaries for travelling around with the object of pretending that their personal attention to trivial details is essential to good government. There is one aspect of the matter, however, that is really serious. Why should the taxpayers have to pay the cost of a special car, /j/iix travelling allowances and expenses, in order to enable a Minister to journey to a distant town to be present at a banquet to a defeated "Liberal" candidate? In England the Liberals and Unionists . alike would think such a thing nothing less than indecent. Why, for example, should the banquet to the defeated candidate for Stratford cost the taxpayer anything ? But it will.