The Daily News. TUESDAY, AUGUST 2. AN ELECTIVE EXECUTIVE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 97, 2 August 1910, Page 4

The Daily News. TUESDAY, AUGUST 2. AN ELECTIVE EXECUTIVE.

A farcical position was observed in Parliament the other day on the question of freeholders versus leaseholders. Many leaseholders! voted freehold, and many freeholders voted leasehold. That is to say, personal belief v. conviction do not count with all politicians; and men of various constituencies vote against the convictions of the people who give them 'their billets, entirely for party purposes. It is a quaint business, this party system. There is a majority in the House for the freehold, but no majority vote; so that, to be frank, the House contaiuc a proportion of dishonest meui. New Zealand claims to be democratic, and in a democracy the majority rules. The man who tramples on his own faith, even to save a party, is not a democrat. Two bullocks are yoked to a dray. They are bound for the same place. The more quickly they arrive, the sooner they will be fed and the better for their owner. But one hangs back and hinders the other, and the dray remains where it is. Dray, New Zealand legislation; offside bullock, the Opposition Party; nearside bullock, the Government Party. New Zealand copies the Old Country in its constitution. At Home the parties are widely severed —the wealthy classes versus the people. There is reason to fight with part}' weapons where great privileges are to be retained or lost. In New Zealand the lines of demarcation are less rigid. Presumably, Sir Joseph Ward and Mr. W. Massey desire the same ultimate goal of success and prosperity for the people of New Zealand. But men with definite ideas on the great questions o, the day in New Zealand subordinate their ideas to the wretched pastime of "ins" and "outs.". There is, one would say, no real "conservatism" on either side of Parliament, as there is in England, and this being granted there is no

reason for the insane methods now in vogue, by "which a most important fssue is indefinitely hung up, and the people with whom Parliament plays are left in a state of helpless surprise and suspense. It will be conceded that the method of • selection of a Ministry is haphazard and ridiculous. It is not a question s«lectino the ablest men from the whole of the available members of Parliament, but of the selection by one man of the men who will be most likely to support him, no matter what their personal convictions are, and irrespective of his convictions on any matter. It ia possible also to include in a Ministry men whom the people have had no hand in electing to Parliament. Under the present system, therefore, tie Ministry is undemocratic. Members of the Lower House are duly elected by the people, but one member of Parliament drops his handkerchief on seven men, and they are duly licensed to govern the country. Parliament has nothing -whatever to do with the selection of the eisrht men of the Cabinet. Politics should be not so much a case of spoils to the chosen as of service to the people. .The people of the country have confidence in their members of Parliament; otherwise they would not elect them. They would therefore have confidence in the ability of the House to elect an executive and for the executive to elect the Premier. The Premier, if he views the business of the country as a party matter, would naturally object to the elective executive idea, even though he were convinced that the House would select him as one of ithe Cabinet, and the Cabinet as its Premier. Mr. Massey might object on the grounds that he has had recent encouragement, and that under

the party system he might climb to the benches on a vote which did not represent the real conclusions of the voters. But the House itself, apart from the leaders, might possibly consider the question from the people's point of view, and the people want the best service for their good money. During the present session of Parliament the dreariest and more barren party warfare has taken place. Absolutely no constructive work has been done. It is painfully obvious that men in Parliament believe that if they talk they are doing the work of the country. Floods of words—most of them about nothing—have flowed, and will continue to flow, until the members get tired of hearing themselves. Then it will be suddenly remembered that, apart from party strife and no confidence motions, and the game of "in" and "out," that there is- necessary work to be done. The House will get down to work feverishly, and will, as before, rush legislation through at lightning The session after, when the On-ltf-inT i- finished, hasty legislation w.i'l be iivviwiil"'! and patched up—not heic:iiw(. thr TTon-c loicvs. it should be p.'iloh'd up. hut heenusp experts <-'.iy ■">. Son-c .lav. >"hon Ss.!fßiu:zs !];;!> ;■■ ' h>p--"t»'i ir i -» 1-y"?

nate to the business of the eodutrv. If | there is a member of Parliament who | is able to show tne peop.e any value for | the money spent during this session of j pitiful barking it would be good to hear him speak. There are many companies in the world which command greater in- | terests than are contained in New Zea- ; land. None of these companies would ' dire to employ the hap-hazard system of 'selection of its head? as New Zealand jdoes, unless it courted disaster. While the country sticks to (he 'fayed method now in vogue, so loii" will Parliament , be a mere talk shop, where work is not always the most important consideraI tion.