The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1912. PARTY GOVERNMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 206, 28 February 1912, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1912. PARTY GOVERNMENT.

A Parliament is a body whose duty is to confer, in order that the business of the State—that is the whole peoplemay be honestly, skilfully'and carefully performed. Few Parliament's do their duty, for this is impossible where rival parties by their partisanship claim that they and they alone can perform those things necessary for the welfare of the State. A Parliamentary Party in power, bj perpetually fighting the party out of power, alleges that the people represented by the "outs" are unworthy of Parliament's aid. The assumption of any ome party is that the other is wrong-headed, that it is inimical to interests of the State, and must be prevented from working for the people. In the party struggle, the people having supplied the material for the struggle, are carefully lost sight of. The idea of government by party is an idea hard to fight and harder to slay. Politics is the only business where the representatives of the shareholders—the general public—live and hold their positions by disagreeing. There is no analogy in any other form of activity. Ordinary commercial affairs could not be run on Parliamentary lines, for a house divided against itself cannot stand. It may be presumed that in their hearts both parties of a Parliament desire to work for the whole of the people who employ them. The business of one party is to prevent the other party working. It is generally considered necessary, despite personal views, that one party shall almost totally disagree with the other party's platform, because party politics are based on the assumption that the "other fellow" has no views that are worth consideration. It is conceivable that Mr. Massey and Sir Joseph Ward as members of one Ministry would fc« more tfseful public servants if they were not sworn political enemies aching less to do the business of the people than to achieve each other's political scalps. The abolition of the party system in New Zealand would give Parliament its first chance to concentrate its genius solely on the affairs of the country and its people, for there would then be no necessity to sink every consideration but that of fighting a party either to deprive it of office or to keep it from obtaining office. A reeent article in the Standard of Empire suggests that the time is opportune for "giving the Empire a lesson in nonparty government," asking wiiy Sir J. G. Ward and Mr. Massey should not call a round-table conference of their ablest followers and from them select a Ministry. There would then be no occasion for every politician to exercise the pathetic care he now does to prevent himself making Blips, nor would he have to swear allegianee to principles to which he was

in his heart opposed. On the ground alone that the time now wasted in bickering would be saved to the country the non-party system appeals, and Parliament would be able to proceed with the business of the country, and, although the country condones the antiquated method,'it suffers much by it. •