CABINET CHANGES

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 25, 22 September 1931, Page 2

CABINET CHANGES

In our Parllamentary correspondent's survey of the political position published yesterday, there occurs a paragraph which may be ironically read. It is this: "This gives rise to a rumour that Mr. W. P. Endean may be in the Cabinet although he has not displayed any outstanding ability in tbe House." Without selecting Mr. Endean for special mention, this eomment might well app. y to the qualifications of a number of those who, successfully or otherwise, are at present aspiring to Cabinet rank; in fact, it might almost serve as an epitome of a majority of those gentlemen who for the past three years have been drawing £450 a year with free travelling expenses and other incidentals to provide "noises off" for the chief actors in the Parliamentary puppet show. There can be no question that an amalgamation of the United and Reform political forces will materially strengthen the Cabinet — but even then it is open to doubt whether whatever personnel may be selected will possess sufficient unity and strength to cope with the situation. The United Cabinet as it stood could not inspire confidence in any unbiassed observer; judged on the record of its achievements it was one of the most mediocre collections which has occurred in any Parliamentary history; while very much the same dictum would apply to any Reform Cabinet which could have been formed as the party is at present represented in Parliament. The tentative selection which our eorrespondent makes of the possible constitution of the new Cabinet appears to be a reasonable arrangement. He suggests that Messrs. Stallworthy, Taverner, de la Perrelle, Donald, Veitch and Atmore will probably be on the retired list in the United ranks and from the performances of these gentlemen their elimination will be very little loss to the country. Under Mr. Stallworthy, the Health JDepartment has been entirely in the hands of departmental heads and the various oracular utterances which its Minister has provided from time to time have done little to alleviate the position. The same critieism applies to Messrs de la Perrelle and Taverner, both of whom have been distinctly uninspiring in their administration. Mr. Perrelle's general. policy in regard to the Publicity Department in partieular has been stultifying in the extreme and has nullified very considerably the more intelligent attitude which was beginning to be adopted in this mis-used Department. Mr. Veitch, although a retired railwayman himself, did not apparently find that experience of any great assistance in surmounting railway problems and was only saved from further difficulties by the removal of the Department for his control. Of the other five, Mr. Atmore has given the most indicatons of ability and his claims should undoubtedly take precedence over those of any of the other four. His education administration has not been particularly distinguished and his administration of the Child Welfare Department leaves considerable ground for critieism, but in many directions his policy has displayed more intelligence than that adopted by his Reform predecessor, Mr. R. A. Wright. It can at least be set to Mr. Atmbre's credit that he has placed a proper insistance upon the importance of agricultural education and has done his best to foster its development. For the rest, Messrs. Forbes and Ransom will not be challenged in their claims to portfolios; whatever criticisms may be levelled against these two gentlemen they have a record of achievement to their credit. The Hon. R. Masters also, although he has kept discreetly in the background, is one of the few powers in this very much underpowered- party. Whatever selection may be made, the elimination of a number of the present holders of portfolios cannot materially endanger the welfare of the country upon which during their tenure of office, they have made remarkably little impression. .A — — » ^