Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The New Zealand Times. FRIDAY, JUNE 11, 1920. FREE PASSAGES

The Canterbury' Chamber of Commerce has attacked the Government with considerable reason as well as point. This by way of protest against sho grant of free passages by the ferry steamers of the Union Company to members of Parliament.. Not out of any hostility to the company is the protest made, but on the broad ground that “no member of the Legislature as such should bo placed under a private and personal obligation to the proprietor, or proprietors, of any private business.” This sounds unanswerable. Sc) does the converiio proposition which can bo put into the form of a question; For example, why. should any private business, honourably and fairy conducted, give legislators different treatment from the treatment of the general public? Ju both the principle is sound, and any departure from sound principle in the treatment of public men is radically objectionable, and should be upt hi likable in a properlygoverned country. This docs not imply that members of the Legislature cannot bo allowed to travel free. On the contrary, they should be given free passage, and on such conditions as may encourage them to the maximum of travel, within the limits of. their own country. The reason is obvious. To do their duty by the country they help to govern, "making its lava; and voting moneys for the development of its resources, they should see as much of the_country and of its people as possible. That is .the only way to acquire knowledge at first hand, and there is no" knowledge equal to firsthand knowledge. For this reason the State gives the members permanent free passes over its railways, and pays their faros for private transport in connection with their work in Parliament. The State, being interested in improving the knowledge of its political workciis, can provide these passes and payments without question or suspicion, ns, indeed, acting for the ■public advantage. Rut that does not apply to private transport companies. They have no more interest in legislators than in any other people they carry about the country. They cannot, therefore, justify any differential treatment between them. This applies to legitimate interest only. If there is any other interest, it cannot he allowed to influence the management, for the reason that it is not a legitimate interest. The privilege of a. free pass is valuable; it may- bo withdrawn by the private giver by reason of the political conduct of the bolder, for, unlike a .State pans, it io not guaranteed bylaw; therefore, the free pass is at least a perpetual cause of suspicion. That wo take to be the basis of the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce protest, which we, of course, endorse. Exactly what is in contemplation has not been very definitely stated. The idea appears to bo tnat legislators may have freedom of the Union Company’s ferry boatn just as they have of the State railways. Why confine the freedom to the ferry boats r If it is useful to tlie legislator on the ferry boats, it will be as useful to him on all the other coastal boats; indeed, more so, for it will in tho latter boats enlarge his knowledge of the coast considerably; and this, we must remember, is a maritime country with a coast-line of 4000 miles. That, however, is not the point raised. Tho point is of free passes, we take it, on tho ferry boatn for the whole Parliamentary’ period. This may bo right or wrong, may or may not bo necessary for Parliamentary usefulness. Assuming tho necessity, the right way to recognise it is, as tho Canterbury Chamber has suggested, by payment from the Consolidated Fund. In that case tho company will give no favour, and the legislator will receive his concession from tho Government as part of his legal status. There will be no suspicion, . because there will bo no inducement. It may be—and emphatically it is—a small matter. But if we keep tho course clear and clean in small matters, those of larger concern will never got out of order.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19200611.2.22

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10613, 11 June 1920, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
683

The New Zealand Times. FRIDAY, JUNE 11, 1920. FREE PASSAGES New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10613, 11 June 1920, Page 4

The New Zealand Times. FRIDAY, JUNE 11, 1920. FREE PASSAGES New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10613, 11 June 1920, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert