The Globe. TUESDAY JULY 2, 1878

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1366, 2 July 1878, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY JULY 2, 1878

Yesterday morning the Lyttelton Times came to the rescue of Sir G. Grey, Mr. Gisborne, and the Hokitika constituency in connection with the election of Mr. George to the House of Representatives. Our contemporary apparently can see nothing worthy of censure in the conduct of any of those wo have named. Why should he P Tho Grey party have gained another vote if their power in other respects has not been increased, and the Hokitika constituency have earned the goodwill of the Premier in taking his assurance that Mr. George would be a fit representative, in spite of the proofs which that gentleman gave to the contrary. “ After all,” it is asked, “ why are tho electors of Hokitika to bo blamed for choosing the best candidate ? They had numistakeahly shown that they wished to identify themselves with the public policy announced by Sir G. Grey. They had a perfect right to select a representative who, in their opinion, would be most able to secure justice to the public claims of Hokitika and the West Coast generally.” Judged by the standard set up by our contemporary, tho course taken by tho electors of Hokitika is worthy of all praise; meausured by another, it must be characterised as time serving and subservient to tho last degree, and as reflecting discredit, not only upon tho particular locality, but upon the colony generally. Tho inability of tho Times “ to understand and analyse the censure bestowed,” is a matter for regret. A little more atteution, however, to the actual question at issue would help him out of the difficulty, But it is not our intention, now, to enter upon a discussion of Mr. George’s qualifications as a representative, but to discuss one or two points raised by tho 1 yttelton Times in tho course of yesterday’s article. He calls attention to the prevalence of two political evils to which electoral districts in which vacancies arise are at present more or less subjected. Our contemporary says; — One is the difficulty of getting suitable local candidates, and the other is the necessity of looking for a man who, in the general Parliamentary race for local public works, will bo able to secure a fair share for the district. We say advisedly that those are political evils. We are quite aware of the public advantage of not restricting the choice of constituencies to residents in the district, but as a general rule, ceteris paribus, the country is beat served by men who reside in and are well acquainted with the districts which they represent in Parliament. • . • The other evil, that of looking on a member as a sort of promoter of locai works, is also of a grave character. The exaltation and development of this relation of a representative to his constituents, does much to disorganise politics and to demoralise the Legislature. . . . The effective cause of these two evils can be easily ascertained. It is the direct outcome of provincial abolition, parliament has been called on to take the place of nine-tenths of our local self-government. One result is, that persons cannot be found to go to Wellington for a third of each year to do badly there what had been, and should be, well done on the spot. That accounts for the scarcity of candidates. The other result is, that each electoral community, feeling day by day the urgent want ot those things, tho local supply of which had been cut off, and looking upon a distant Parliament as an inexhaustible monster manufactory of the articles needed, is anxious to secure its share, —and, in case of accidents, a little more than its share,—of tho good things going. Into tho question of whether the country is best served by men who reside in and are acquainted with the districts which they represent in Parliament, it is not necessary to enter here. It is evident, however, that districts are finding increasing difficulty in obtaining suitable candidates to represent them. Several of our trusted public men have retired from political life of late, and had the vacancies filled by men of an inferior class. The other evil, “ that of looking on a member as a sort of promoter of local works,” is also a grave danger. Apart from any other result, such a eystom of having small works appro-

printed in the General Legislature must enormously increase the taxation of the colony. If it once becomes a recognised practice for members to get a variety of small appropriations for their district, there will ho no limit to our extravagance. The remedy lies in getting the Counties Act into full operation throughout the whole of Now Zealand, for it provides all the necessary machinery for the kind of works under notice. Of course if the Government of the day encourage such claims, members are sure to bring them forward. If, instead of setting their face against the practice, the members of the Ministry crowd the estimates with sums for their own districts, the oxistanco of the evil is not to ho wonded at. After the part played by our contemporary when Abolition was before the colony, and when ho stood a “ solitary beacon ” on the bleak shores of Opposition, wo do not expect him soon to forget the position ho then occupied. Ever since, he he* found a melancholy pleasure in tracing every evil under which the colony suffers, from the increase of crime to the election cf Mr. George for Hokitika, to Abolition. But wo do not see how it is possible to prove that the effective cause of tho two evils spoken of in our contemporary’s article of Monday is the directoutcome of Provincial Abolition, as assorted by the Lyttelton Times. The provinces wore swept away because they had nothing to do. One after another their functions wore taken from them —immigration, public works, &c.,had to betaken charge ot by the General Government.. To have maintained them longer would have boon to keep up costly machinery to go through the form of doing work which could ho equally well done without them.' While they lasted the colony had to find funds for tho provinces to administer,, and also to pay the cost of administration. Abolition proved that nearly all the provinces wore unable to bear the charges legally placed upon them. Abolition did not destroy local self-government, for tho now system is more local than provincialism ever was. Nor is it true that the length of the sessions since provincialism was abolished is due principally to the increased amount of local business done by Parliament. An examination of h (insard will tell a different tale. The waste of time during the last two sessions has undoubtedly been very great indeed, and tho public interests have suffered in consequence. This, however, has been almost entirely the result of party spirit imported into every discussion, and not on account of the attention given to the real business before tho House.