THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, JANUARY 28, 1893. MR ROLLESTON’S SPEECH.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2457, 28 January 1893, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, JANUARY 28, 1893. MR ROLLESTON’S SPEECH.

xiiKKO art) HLur a lew points m tlie speech of the Hon. W. Kolleston to which we desire to refer. Mr Kolleston complained very bitterly of the Opposition having been accused of wasting time, and insisted that the real stone-wallers were the Government party. (Speaking impartially we certainly think that there were faults on both sides, but without doubt the greatest sinners were the Opposition. They started with the theory that as they could not turn the Government out they would not allow any business to be transacted, and they kept that up until the Government party began to sit night and day continuously. The Opposition had then to give in and allow the business to be transacted. The next thing of which Mr Kolleston complained was, want of information. The Public Works Statement was not delivered until late in the session. Now the Financial Statement was brought up a couple of days after Paliament met, and the debate on it was kept up for a month. That was quite unnecessary, and the Public Works Statement had nothing to do with it, but Mr Kolleston consoles his honest soul by telling us that “ We of the Opposition did our work well, and criticised the Government well.” Just so, a little too well, and too long, and this explains the whole thing. But though Mr Eolleston was on the whole complimentary to the Government, he could not help letting his anger get the better of him occasionally. He said the Government “ hold office by reckless promises, by assenting to every fad, by pandering to every prejudice, and being all things to all men.” This is just Mr Kolleston’s style allround. His speeches are generally made up of platitudes and assertions like the one above quoted, without a single argument to support them. Mr Kolleston forgot to mention one promise the Government have broken, one fad to which they have assented, or one prejudice to which they have pandered, while the fierce opposition they have aroused shows conclusively that they have not been “ all things to all men.” The monopolists will deny that they have been all things to them, at any rate. Mr Kolleston will find that the Government hold office by the safest and surest tenure possible, the will of the people. Mr Kolleston devoted a good deal of atttention to the Legislative Council, the basis of his contention being that it was wrong for the Government to appeal to the Home Government against the decision of the Governor. That question is, however, settled—and settled in a manner that has given satisfaction to the country. We feel certain that ninetenths of the people are better satisfied with what happened than that the country should have been put to the cost of a general election. Of course a general election would have suited Mr Kolleston better, because it would have damaged the Government to put the country to expense. As for the assertion that if the Government had appointed half-a-dozen members to the Legislative Council they would have been able to carry their measures, every one knows that that is not true. Still Mr Rolleston’s assertion to that effect is valuable, inasmuch as that he admits that the Council hampered the Government policy, and that there was absolute necessity for making appointments. One leading feature in Mr Kolleston’s speech was its boastfulness. It was he and his party did everything, but when we remember that, with the exception of two brief intervals of about four years altogether, they have held office since a constitution was granted to the colony, it would really have been astonishing if they had not done something. We freely admit that they have done a great deal. They sold the country to large companies and land-sharks, and borrowed and spent about £30,000,000 of money, and the result of it all was that they left us up to the neck in debt and depression. They taxed the poor for the sake of the rich, and fostered foreign companies while crushing local industries. They did all this and more, and the worst two men amongst them were Sir Harry Atkinson and Mr Kolleston, just because they were the best. This appears paradoxical, but it is none the less true. Sir Harry Atkinson and Mr Kolleston were sufficiently Liberal to fool the people, not Liberal enough to carry the measures which the country required. The consequence was that they were able to gull the public by throwing a little Liberalism into the most capitalistic policies that could have been thought of. Sir Harry Atkinson was in the habit of making speeches on land nationalisation, and the generous soul of Mr Kolleston expanded so that he actually established village settlements of quarter-acre allotments. This is what Mr Kolleston has been boasting of, but those he settled on quarter-acre sections will appreciate his generous option when then they recall the fact that during the couple of years 3ir Ball ance held office he increased these "'<in to an acre, five acres, ten, acres, as circumstances twenty, ana ... of the differences permitted. This iso... Liberals, between the old and the ne,, Mr Koileston’s idea was a quarter or .... acre section ; Mr Ballanco gave the working men as much land as he could under the circumstances. The village settlers knew this, and they will appreciate Mr Kolleston’s thanks to God that the interests of the poor are being attended to.