The Globe. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1875.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 447, 19 November 1875, Page 2

The Globe. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1875.

It seema agreed upon on all sides’ that the question which will come before the electors at the approaching contest, is what form of Government is to take the place of the present Provincial Institutions. With one or two unimportant exceptions, the members of the Opposition have tacitly admitted that things cannot continue as they are at present. While using every argument within their reach to prove that the provincial form of Government is the one best suited to the requirements of the colony, they have at the same time been careful to indicate that a modification is necessary. But unfortunately for their chance of success, they each have their own plan to propose. Mr. Stout is the most ultra-provincialist of the number. He is prepared to allow the Constitution of the colony to remain exactly as it was before the Abolition Bill was carried. But he does not attempt to show how the system is to be maintained —how the bankrupt provinces are to be carried on. Enough for him that the province of Otago remains untouched. Mr Macandrevv again has a policy also. He is well enough informed to know that a modification in our form of Government must come about, and he tries to find in Separation a remedy for all our ills. His plan is that each island shall have power to provide for the maintenance of its own peace and good government, and for the management of its own local affairs, irrespectively and indepentiy of each other, and that the powers and functions of the General Assembly shall be distinctly defined, and be limited to questions purely federal. He does not touch upon the question whether there should be one or two Provincial Councils for each island, but his own opinion leans strongly towards having at least two provinces in each. It is perhaps unfair to criticise too closely Mr Macandrew’s scheme, with only a telegraphic summary of it before us; but if the outline of his plan is correct, then all we can say is that his ideas are evidently as yet unmatured. He does not tell us in what way he would secure the good government of each island independently. Are his proposed two Provincial Councils for each Island to have independent powers ; or is a Parliament for each island to be created as well ? The former is no doubt his idea. We would point out, however, that such a plan will not secure local self-government. As we have said before, such Councils can only exist by absorbing the functions at present exercised by our Provincial Councils, in addition to many of those at present held by the General Assembly. Suppose the Middle Island were ruled by two Provincial Councils, Otago, Westland, and a porlion of South Canterbury would probably comprise the Southern district, and the remainder of Canterbury, Marlborough, and Nelson would be the other. Would the outlying portions of those districts be contented to be governed by a body of men meeting at JDunedin and say Blenheim? Their local affairs would be more neglected than they have ever been. If, on the other hand, Mr Macandrew’s scheme includes proposals for the establishment of local self-goierning bodies, then his Councils are unnecessary. They would be a waste of legislative power as well as absurdly expensive. The General Assembly could much better and more economically do the same work. It thus appears that separation must of necessity be centralising in its effects, for in no other manner could it exist at all. We hope, therefore, that the electors, when they come to exercise their votes, will remember this. The Government of the day offer them real local selfGovefnment. The local bodies are to have full power to spend the local revenue, including the land fund, after certain charges are deducted, and which always have been deducted. On the other hand the so-called Provineialist party, composed be it remembered principally of provincial officers, propose instead, a Central, or two Central Governments, for each island. These Councils, we suppose, are to manage our local affairs, to vote the sums to be spent on our roads, bridges, and charitable institutions. And this is local Government. The proposals of the Government are infinately preferable to such a plan.