WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 5 December 1927, Page 4

WELLINGTON TOPICS

THE LICENSING RILL. PRIME MINISTER DIVESTS HIMSELF OF RESPONSIBILITY. (Special to “ Guardian.”) WELLINGTON, Dec. 1. Though lie is diffident to a decree In both speech and manner there is no niock modesty about the Prime Minister. ,\ moulder of pretty compliments for his political friends and his political opponents alike, he does not forget on occasions to say a good word for himself. In making his carefully prepared statement concerning his own attitude towards his roughly handled Licensing Bill in the House on Tuesday night he reminded the Helcrmers sitting around him that they were not there merely on account ol their qualifications for public service, but largely by virtue of their attachment to the dominant political party and to their pledge to support him as their leader.

" I think." In- said, " that at the last general election many members ol the Reform Party were returned not only on their personal qualifications or as a result of their own appeal to the electors, but largely by virtue of the fact that they announced their adherence to the Reform Party and their intention to support mysell as leader.” Reminders of this kind usually are reserved for the whips’ room, but the Prime Minister with his militant instincts obviously wished to remind the Prohibitionists on his side of the House that their pledge to him was at least as good as their pledge to the ” bare majority.”

IN A MINORITY. Last night tin. Prime Minister, in returning to the consideration ol the Licensing Rill, repeated and emphasized bis absolute and immovable objection to the bure-majority in determining the fate of the Liquor Trade. ‘’With the exception of those providing for tin- bare majority,” he said. '• I am in favour of the amendments which have been made in the Bill. . . So long as the Bill contains the hare majority clauses I shall be opposed to it. . . I repeat that I am entirely opposed to the principle of the bare majority in cases of this kind. . . I will not vote for the third reading. . .

I will not move the third reading.” For a bare majority required to carry prohibition throughout the country—otto repeal it when once carried—Mr Coates would substitute a “ fifty-five, fortyfive” majority, or, in other words, assuming that 700,0110 electors record their votes at the licensing poll next year, it would need 335.001 to carry prohibition, and only 315.001, a minority of 09,<',99 to retain continuance. It is necessary, the Prime Minister says, to maintain this measure of stability in older that the pendulum of licensing shall not swing from one side to the other with each recurring poll.

TWO YEARS AGO. Naturally the Labour members of the House listening to bis denunciation ol the bare majority, have not been slow to remind the Prime Minister that he holds office himself by virtue of a minority vote falling between .12.009 and 13,000 short of being one-half of the total votes polled at the general election two years ago. Tn the light of recent happenings the figures of that election will bear repetition. Reform polled 111 1,577 votes, and secured fifty seats; Labour LSI,.‘ISA votes mid thirteen seats; Nationalists 130.05 I votes and nine seats and “Others ” 35.435 votes and three seats. Tl •

“ Others,” popularly known as “ Independents.” who secured seats were Air H. Atmoro Nelson!. Sir Charles Htatham (Dunedin Central), and Sir •Joseph Ward (Invercargilll. Had the election been belli under the system of proportional representation, which gives to each party as nearly as possible the measure of representation to which it is entitled by its numbers. Reform would have secured thirty-five seats. Labour twenty-one. Nationalist fifteen, and •' Others ” four. Perhaps Mr Coates may retort that minority rule in Parliament is less incongrous and less perilous than is minority rule in licensing matters; but apparently many of his own political friends regard the

” ((iminnii sense of most ” ils quite ;i reliable guide in determining whether there shall he license or proliiliition. POST AM) TELEGRAPH SERVICES ■ In n crowded life of commercial activity Sir Harold Beauchamp finds time to of his financial knowledge to many grateful recipients; hot he is not always happy in his handling of the finances of public departments. Addressing the members of one of the suburban progressive associations tinother nit'llt he told quite a deplorable story of the increasin'; expenditure of the Post and Telegraph Department, which, he said, had increased its staff from 59G1 in 1919 to 8709 in 1927 and its salaries from €771.191 to L'l.ofiK.HS in the same period. This sort of thing, he insisted, was going on in all the public departments. In 1911 the cost of administration was 91,819 per thousand people and in 1927 it was 93.237 per thousand, " practically doubled in thirteen years.” In this morning’s paper the Postmaster-Gen-eral reminds Sir Harold of many facts he had overlooked. During the last twelve years, the Hon. \Y. Xoswortliy points out, the revenue of the department has increased hy 114 per cent, while the expenditure has increased only hy 100 per cent, notwithstanding a large advance in tin* basic wage; the operations of the department have increased hy 212 per tent, while the permanent staff has increased hy only 47 per cent ; and its annual transactions have swollen from 9G0.000.000 t 9200.00n.000. Above and beyond all those facts is the further fact that a great volume of work previously performed by other departments now is imposed upon the Post and Telegraph Department. Sir Harold, doubtless, will see the point.