WELLINGTON TOPICS.

Taihape Daily Times, 1 November 1917, Page 5

WELLINGTON TOPICS.

NATIONAL GOVERNMENT th;4 non-party experiment. (Special Correspondent.) WELLINGTON Oct 31. Tile happenings during the dying days of the session have revived interest in several questions which

were eagerly discussed on both shies of the House when the National Cabinet was first proposed and w-hen it was actually formed. When Mr Massey 'made overtures to Sir Joseph Ward for a combination of forces for the period of the war the leader of the Opposition made it an imperative condition of his acquiescence that there should be equal representation of the two parties in the Ministry. It was on this rock that the negotiations between the leaders threatened to split. Each of them was insistent on his own view of the situation. Mr Massey demanded “a preponderance of power” and Sir Joseph Ward positively refused to accept anything less , than Then the Governor intervened and as a result of a confer- , ence between His Excellency and the party leaders the present National Cabinet, consisting of six Ministers from each side, was formed. THE VACANT PORTFOLIO. Thi s was the arrangement that existed up to the time of the death of Dr. McNab, which occurred during the absence ef Mr Massey and Sir Joseph Ward in and it was generally expected that Sir John Findlay who succeeded Dr. McNab in, the representation of the Hawke’s Bay electorate, would be invited to take his deceased friend’s place in the Cabinet. B*ut apparently Sir John was not entertaining ambitions in that direction. He very respectfully, but quite firmly ? to second the Address-in-Reply at the opening of Parliament and while remaining scrupulously loyal to his pledge to support the National Government has frankly criticised its administration and deplored its failure to realise all the expectations of its friends. His own admirers are talking of him as the leader of a new democratic party after the war and meanwhile he is - keeping his own counsel and proving a great acquisition to the debating power of the House. . j ; . ted ',. REFORM , PREPONDERANCE ■ The point , however, which is in- .... -y..- y -

teresting the public, or, rather, that portion of it which takes any interest in such matters is that the absence of successor to the late Dr. McNab in v the National Government has left Mr Massey with the preponderance of power he insisted upon before the Governor’s intervention. There are now six Reform s,Ministers and five ~ Liberal Ministers sitting at the Cabinet table land many people profess to .—.see in the happenings of the last few :,v< days the dominant hand of the Reform majority It is a matter of constitutional as well as of precedent and of etiquette, that the minority in the Cabinet must stand loyally by the decisions of the majority. The only alternative open to the Minister who cannot reconcile his own views to those of a majority of his colleagues is resignation, and resignation in war apart from all personal considerations, is a serious matter. NON-PARTY GOVERNMENT. Whether or not the formation of a National' Cabinet has given the country non-party government is still a moot question. While the two parties were equally represented it did so theoretically, but even then it was easy for a Minister, one one side or the other, to impart a party bias to his administration. Now with one party holding a majority in the CabiXinet the same bias may be given to legislation. That this has actually happened during the last day or two several members of the House not # J ordinarily given to unreasoning prejudices, are ready to contend. They say that a Constitution built up on the party system does not lend itself to the ideal of non-party government and that the most to be expected from the suspension of sectional hostilities is more or less unsatisfactory government by compromise. To this extent the National Cabinet, with all its good war work to its credit, has been a failure.