THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1907. MINISTERIAL HYSTERIA.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXX, Issue 9007, 17 December 1907, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1907. MINISTERIAL HYSTERIA.

If the views of the Premier are to be given effect to, the Government will start upon an unparalleled building policy, which will more or less disor-\ ganise the whole public 'service, and involve the dominion m enormous expenditure. Sir Joseph Ward links three great undertakings together. Firs't, new Parliamentary buildings; second, new Departmental buildings; and third, a new Government House. The proposal to remove the site of Parliament buildings to Government House site would, as has been already stated, render the General Assembly Library a'nd the pa/tiallycompleted extensions to Parliament buildings useless, while it would necessitate finding another site for Government House, and the erection of a costly residence thereon. Sir Joseph Ward's idea is either to give up to his Excellency part of the Botanical Gardens or the large and valuable Mount View Asylum site. In the former case the public would be deprived of one of its most valued heritages, and th« city authorities of a large source of revenue through its enormous tramway traffic to the domain ; in the latter case a huge pile of buildings would have to be demolished in order to erect a vice-regal residence in the place thereof. Then, if the Departmental buildings are to be placed on the present Parliamentary site, not only will the existing buildings on Lambhton Quay have to

be taken down, and costly new premises erected in Molesworth Street, but other public offices—if all the public buildings are to be on one block, as desired by the Premierwould have to be abandoned and fresh structures put up. Will such a revolutionary and costly scheme be tolerated? We think not. ******

Sir Joseph Ward uses a marvellous argument in favour of the very costly process of changing the present Parliamentary building site. It is that "it is surrounded by four streets forming a square, and access by vehicles and pedestrians can be obtained on every side in contrast to the present building, which had only one door at which a carriage could be drawn'up." Needless to inform any one who was acquainted with the old Parliament building so that the one main entrance mure than sufficed for every legitimate purpose. Even if there were a congestion of traffic occasionally no prudent man would consider thit a sufficient excuse for entering into an expenditure running into hundreds of thousands of pounds because the re-arrangement of sites and erection of r.ew buildings as proposed would run into those figures. There could never be a congestion of traffic for purely Parliamentary purposes. It is only when public functions are given that there I is a "crush," and sometimes these functions are arranged for party pur- [ poses rather than for the public weal. ! ******

The chances are that very little will be done during next session of Parliament beyond discussing problems arising out of the destruction of Parliament buildings. One of the questions that will assuredly take a prominent position is, why there was no insurance upon the property destroyed? The Premier's answer to that question is not likely to find approval in the country, however, it may be accepted b> Parliament. Sir Joseph Ward contends that if the Government paid premiums to insure all its buildings throughout the dominion the cost would be greater than what would be the loss if two or three public buildings were burnt down every year. This is practically an argument against insurance altogether,; and yet the Government was very eager to establish a fire insurance department of its own in competition with colonial offices. Anticipating the suggestion that the Government might have run its own insurance fund, or sinking fund, the Premier told an interviewer that to do so "would not . amount to much more than a matter of book entries." That is so much fudge. Many large shipping companies carry on their own insurance, and ! have found it to be to their advantage when their vessels have been destroyed by fire or water. But it would appear that with the Government'"a bad excuse is better than none at all."

The Wellington papers have been endeavouring to get at public opinion as to the, proposals of erecting new Parliament buildings on the site of Government House. Mr F. M. B. Fisher, M.P.. states that he does not approve of the Premier's suggestion to erect the buildings on that site, as the old site contains ample space for any buildings the dominion would require for legislative purposes for many years to come. The expenditure would, he felt sure, be opposed in the House by the country members, especially in view, of the fall in wool. The Mayor of Wellington strenuously opposes the proposal, aw he fails to see—as probably will the citizens generally—what\arguments can be advanced in favour of ! it. In any case he considers the present site an ideal one. "In my opinion," said the Mayor to an interviewer, it is proposed to spend far too much money in re-building Parliament House. Only the urobable requirements of the next thirty or forty years should be provided for. He added: "Seeing that money is so badly needed to provide roads, etc., in the back-blocks it would, I consider, not be right to expend anything like as much money as has been suggested on the new buildings." Mr W. Fraser, M.P., states (hat he is not surprised to hear of the proposed change oi site, as it appears that "nothing is too wild" for the Government. The proposal, to his mind, seems nothing but a piece of hideous extravagance. Go- i vernrnent officials and Mr T. M. Wilford, a strong Government supporter, take the Premier's view regarding the removal of the Parliament buildings to Government House site. This was only to be expected. Mr Hogg is, also naturally, of thesame opinion. He goes further, and echoes Sir Joseph Ward's opinion that not only should the n<iW buikTings be on Government House site, but that they "should be built to meet exigencies of the next two hundred years"; by which time he will be able ito look down upon them from a fleecy cloud and console himself with the reflection that he had a hand in the business.

A hint has been thrown out by Mr Fisher, M.P., that it would be advantageous to call Parliament together in March next, pass supply, and then suspend the Triennial Parliament Act, and adjourn until 1909. How disingenuous! It would suit almost every member of Parliament to

have a year's respite from a general election since the electorates have been so cut up as to leave many of them in doubt as to the safety of their seats. If there is a legal possibility of this course Being adopted it will doubtless be attempted. ******* A Masterton resident of progressive mind, informs us that he feels somewhat aggrieved that the claims of Masterton have not been more closely considered when the question of where Parliament shall meet next session was being discussed. He says that as soon as the Hon. Geo. Fowlds arrived on his recent visit Masterton was brought under the notice of the Minister, and it was urged that if Ministers would occasionally visi*; the country, or, let us say the Wairarapa, something in the nature of close settlement would come about in the course of time. Light line railways might be constructed here and there, back country opened up, roads made, and some substantial local industries established. It is hardly visiting the country to fly into it once in a while, enjoy a refreshing cup of tea, and then scurry back into Wellington as quickly as possible to contemplate the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of pounds on public buildings. Our informant expresses the opinion that if Parliament would only hold one session in the country Ministers would know more of the possibilities of the dominion, and have a better idea of the unprogressive character of their administration than could be brought home to them in any other way.