P. LITICAL BRIGANDAGE.

Hokitika Guardian, 19 October 1918, Page 1

P. LITICAL BRIGANDAGE.

(Chcli. “Press.") Oh Wednesday last we dealt in one ol our leading articles with the Auckland campaign to make the satisfaction of Auckland’s ’ demands the main, il "ot the only, object of the public works j policy of this country. On the same day the Auckland “Herald” printed a long leading article in furtherance of the campaign, and in this article it advocated a policy which the public will, wo are confident, think deserving of the severest condemnation. Wo need not summarise the whole article, for with the main features of the Auckland •armuncut everyone is familiar —the intolerance of almost any expenditure south of the Kauri line, and of all expenditure that may involve the curtailment' of- a vote for any Auckland project, the pretence that the South Island is being unduly favoured at Auckland’s expense,- the ignorance of the facts concerning the Westland Canterbury line, the insolence with which the retirement of Sir William Fraser, in favour of a North Island member as Minister of Public Works is demanded but w<« need not catalogue all the characteristics of Auckland’s aggressive provincialism. They all appear in the article under review, which begins with the perfectly sound contention that a hold and vigorous policy of development must be put in hand as soon as the war is over, Tint which turns into an exposition of (he very questionable doctrine that national development means the development of Auckland and nothing else. Tn order that this result may ho achieved, the Auckland “Herald” suggests that the Auckland members should combine and levy political blackmail upon the Government in power. “It i« a matter,” it says, “on which there can he no party difference. Ihe Auckland members ought to stand as a solid phalanx and insist on the rights of the districts they represent. If consultation will produce combined and effective action, let there he consultation before the House meets.” The “Herald” brushes aside the suggestion, often made by “The Press,” that an attempt should he made hv the House to destroy the present system of public works expenditure and replace it by some system into which politics cannot entei. Tt prefers the simpler method of converting the Auckland members into c hand of political highwaymen: “The Auckland members must he prepared to revolt against any Government which spends more on the hopeless Otira Tunnel than on the East Coast railway, nr matter what the political colour of the Government, or even if it he n rs the neutral tint of a coalition.” We thought that we knew a _ good deal concerning Auckland provincialism. hut we confess we never suspected that such shameless political immorality ns this could he openlv preached by a leading organ of Auckland opinion. It is proposed that the Auckland members should-combine and offer tlieir votes to the highest bidder, placing them at the disposal of any Government willing to nay the price of a liberal misuse of public money for Auckland’s benefit. Everything, it is urged should he subordinated to the pillaging of tlio Treasury. The largo questions of principle ami policy are to ho ignored—the sole test of a Government’s fitness for office is for the Auckland members to be, not that partv’s general policy or administration. luit its attitude towards the Auckland demand for booty. Between an Auckland bloc following this line of conduct and the Old Sarum elector who sold his vote for five pounds cash, there would liardlv ho difference enough to matter. Some people may think that the “Herald” is only seeking to terrify the Government or that the Auckland members will not care to adopt the policy recommended to them. However that may he it is clearly desirable that the members of the South Island constituencies should he on their guard, and that the ..public generally should know the standard of political ethics that prevails in the city of Auckland.