WELLINGTON.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 9, 17 October 1871, Page 3

WELLINGTON.

October 11. We take the following latest Parliamentary news from tlie Hawkes Bay Daily Telegraph , of the 10th inst.: — Mr. Stafford criticised the policy of the Government last night in an hour’s speech He stated that he viewed the financial policy (with alarm, 'as likely to lead to hopeless insolvency. The colony has systematically lived beyond its means,and Ministers seem quite satisfied to continue in the same state. He condemned the proposed constitution of a Board of Works as most corrupt, and susceptible of political influence. Members were to ouly hold office for a year, they must consequently be the obedient servants of the Government, or they would never be renominated He was prepared to take issue with Mr. Vogel on the question of his authority to bind the Colony by Brogden’s contracts. He objected most strongly to paying for railways in land, or their construction on colonial guarantee. No provision whatever had been made or proposed for the settlement of people, which was the real key to the policy. He objected to stand by and see the finances ruined, resources wasted, and the country made the prey of speculators and large contractors. Mr. Vogel thought the fact that Mr. Stafford found so little to find fault with was the highest testimony to the soundness of the Government' proposals. He contrasted what had been done by the present Minisliy, and what by the late one. He defended Brogden’s contracts as exceptionably favourable to the Colony. The contractor’s profit are limited to five per cent., and the contractors were so dissatisfied with the bargain that they are not anxious to proceed if held rigidly to the terms. The Government preferred cash payments to land or guarantee, and proposed to limit the latter to half a million. The Government had been and would remain friends to the Provinces. No large reduction of expenditure was possible, and therefore the only way to remedy what Mr. Stafford complained of was by increased taxation. No cast iron scheme of immigration or setlement was possible. There was every probability of the reversion or reduction of the American tariff as regarded wool. He defended the proposed construction of the Board of Works, but was willing to be guided by the House as to details. He was so anxious to see the policy carried out, that it was a matter of insignificance by whom. If others could do it more worthily, he was willing to assist as a private member. Mr Gillies made a long attack on the Government policy, advocating a policy of retrenchment of expenditure, lopping off extravagancies, and living within their means. He denied that the colony was in any way bound by Brogden’s contracts.