PARLIAMENTARY.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XVI, Issue 177, 27 July 1881, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

Wellington, Wednesday. [The first portion of yesterday's Parliamentary proceedings will be found on the fourth page.] Mr Bowen thought that co-confidence debates were generally a useless waste of time and a most inconvenient method of discussing a question of policy or finance. They üßually became mere personal discussions, and it was a question in bis mind whether the colony was really ripe for Parliamentary Government and whether it would not be better for the House to elect a Committee to conduct the administration. He hoped they would get rid of this debate as quickly as possible and then pass the Kedistribation Bill and the Estimates, and then go and address their constituents; Mr Ballance strongly supported the Value of Party Government and contended that the present debate was a legitimate party issue. The Government was trying to raiae & false issue by saying the question was as between their proposals and the restoration of Provincialism. The latter was impossible, they might move in parallel lines but they could not restore bodies whose revenues had been absorbed and whose powers had been given to others* The question really wa3 had the Government fulfilled the promises made when the provinces were abolished that a satisfactory Bystem of local Government should be established in their place. The Premier really did not seem to know what local Government was. The main centres of population were not prepared to accept a central administration, nor were the new centres of population likely to be content to have their affairs administered from the old centres of population. For himself he would not willingly Bee either County Councils or Road Brards abolished; the tendency of Coucty Councils was, he thought, not towards amalgamating, but to I reduce themselves to the position of Road Boards and to discharge their functions 5 this being so, an intermediate body was required between these bodies and the General Government, and the Government had practically admitted thia necessity by their proposals as to charitable aid. He condemned the proposed abolition of Waste Lands Boards, what the country wanted wa3 to have these Boards made elective. The proposals of the Government on this head to abolish the Boards, and simply to make the County Councils advising bodies was evidence of a ttrong desire | to centraliee, aud would not be satisfactory to the country. He challenged Major Atkinson's classification of the subjects, which muot necessarily be centrally administered. For instance sheep and cattle branding, were subjects which could be much better locally administered. At least 9 of the 13 subjects enumerated by Major Atkinson could be much better locally administered, and even the subject of Police wsb one of these. Instead of the Government proposal for making roads through Crown Landa he would like to Bee one third of the price cf the land sold handed back to local bodies to be spent in making roads through the land. This principle worked well now in le^ard to land sold on deferred payments, and should be extended to laad sold for cash. Where Native Lands were benefited by roads made i he agreed that they should be rated, but he objected to these rates being paid for an indefinite time out of the consolidated fund. The proposal was a most unjust one, and no Government dare carry out the system whicbjwould have the effect of depreciating the value of Native Lands, and would practically confiscate a portion of those lands, and could not be carried ont in large portions of the Colony. He strongly opposed the central Board of Works proposal, nearly all its disbursements would have to come out of loan. At considerable leugtb, he pointed out objections to the constitution of the Board, and the extraordinary powers proposed to b 8 given it. He warmly objected to the centralising tendency of the present Government, and thought Sir George Grey's Bill, to a great extent, outlined the form of Local Gavernment required by the Colony. He especially approved of the basis on which that Bill proposed that local bodies should be elected, giving a popular franchise. He also approved of the distribution of fundg on a population basis. He was not, however, prepared to go so far as to allow local bodies to elect judges, but he thought they should appoint the Justices of the Peace, for those at present appointed did not generally command the confidence of the people. He considered the whole policy of the Government highly objectionable, and should vote for the amendment. Mr Andrews said that, as Ministers were willing to alter their proposals and must iatend to withdraw their Bills, he did not see why they should treat the amendment g.% a want of confidence motion. He held that Ministers had shown themselves quite incapable of leading the House or preparing acceptable measures. He 'condemned the prcperty tax, and advocated a land tax. He also opposed strongly the great tendency to have nominated members ia the local bodies. Had they really intended to carry Redistribu tion they should, even if the details were not ready, have long ago brought down their proposal* to determine the principle on which it should take place. If the Canterbury railways were locally managed they would pay half as well again. The Government did not understand the requirements of the country. Ttuy had do policy of their own, and did not enjoy the confidence either of the House or the country. Mr Levin, while not approving of all the Government proposals, had not heard any preferable alternative proposed, and the past administration of affairs by the present Ministry had been so satisfactory that he would require much stronger reasons than any that had been adduced before he would vote to turn them out. Mr Reeves moved the adjournment of the debate, and the House rose at 12-15 a.m.