POLITICAL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2332, 27 October 1908, Page 7

POLITICAL.

RAILWAY MANAGEMENT,

The Premier’s defence of the Government railways policy and the Government railways management—which manipulate', the most splendid railway revenue in Australasia so that tire outcome is a huge and increasing annual loss to New Zealand—was worthy of the Premier and the railways (says the “Wellington Post”). It is quite impossible to say more than that. - Quite irrelevant to the matter are the Premier’s lists of reduced fares and increased concessions to customers. These only show that the customer was grossly overcharged in years gone by. The fact remains that, mile for mile of line, and mil© for mile the trains run, New Zealand users of railways are still' charged at such a high rate that they pay a far greater proportionate revenue than the Australian railways yield. Yet the Australian railways are run at a profit; and New Zealand railways at an enormous . loss. This loss is not due to reduced fares or increased concessions to users—nothing of the kind. It is due to the fact that the railway service has been overstaffed as a nursery of Government voters; it is due to the fact that the management is shockingly extravagant as compared with that of Government railways in other countries. The Premier represents the Government railway policy as giving to railway users the returns over 3 per cent, on capital. The consumers do not get that return; they pay fully, on comparison with other countries, for everything they get—taking results all round. It is the incompetent management and. the swollen staff that eat up the return over 3 per cent., and compel the New Zealand taxpayer, who earns his own living without milking the State cow, to put his hand dii his pocket every year m order to pay interest on the money borrowed every year to square the railway account.

REAL VERSUS SHAM AUDITING

In the Australian States (says the “Evening Post”) an Auditor-Gener-al exercises a real and most valuable function. His annual report to Parliament is a critical commentary upon Treasury -and Departmental expenditure, shedding light on dark places, and forming a trustworthy standard by which tlie truth or falsehood of Government statements may be ascertained. In New Zealand , the Audit-or-General is little more than a dumb dog employed to check additions and certify balances; and if he ventures an occasional wild bark of protest he is promptly whipped back to his kennel. Vie state the fact thus disrespectfully -with all proper respect to the Auditor-General, in order to give readers al true idea- of his importance. The Premier talked last session of reforming the State audit—but of course nothing was done. No vital reform of any kind will ever be made by the Ward Administration. The audit is* a farce at present.’ Were it rightly conducted, and the results made public, it might become a tragedy—for the Ward Administration.

KEEN CRITICISM. Mr. J. Gow, Opposition candidate for the Bay of Plenty seat, in a speech a- Rotorua, keenly criticised tne land legislation of the Government, denouncing the national endowments as a farce. He blamed the Government greatly for failing to do anything to settle the Native land question. He said they had been in office for years, and had to give it XlP ' ADVICE TO ELECTORS. The “Christchurch Press,” dealing with the scarcity of good! Opposition candidates in the feouth island, remarks: —“It is not sufficient to grumble at the class of candidates who present themselves. The electors themselves should take some trouble to induce men of ability and standing to place their services at the disposal of the public, and they should follow this up with a little personal exertion to secure the return of the candidate of whom they approve. When the new Parliament meets we shall, no doubt, have the usual complaints of the deterioration of its personnel, and a little later there will probably be an outcry at the mischievous character ot some of the legislation proposed, at the extravagance of the Administration, and at some further increase of taxation in consequence. If so, it is qiiite safe to predict that the loudest outcry will come from those who were most apathetic at the time when a little live interest in politics on their part might have prevented the evils which they protest against when their protest is too late to be of any good. NEED FOR FEARLESS CRITICS. “Veteran Liberal,” discussing election matters in a Christchurcn paper says: —“Christchurch East and Christchurch North may prove eyeopeners by the time the numbers go up. I hau a very interesting communication from a high Government official in Wellington a few days ago, in which he sums up the situation as follows:—‘I would like to see our old friend Tommy Taylor back in the House. In my opinion there is need of fearless critics like him in the House at present. The Opposition is too weak, and it does not do for any Government to have so much of its own way as the present one does.’ ” A SOCIALIST CANDIDATE. “The trouble with Mr. James Thorn is that he wears seven leagues boots,” says the “Lyttelton Times” of the Socialist candidate for the Christchurch South seat. “An. earnest, honest, young man, lie has many admirable qualities. -But- ho resoin.uiGS' a certain great modern' monarch m his anxiety to reach the’ end of a journey before he starts. . Hits principles are honest and his ideals are attractive. He is certainly progressive. But he is terribly hot-headed, and his judgment is sadly immature. . . His experience among Labor organisations seem to have confirmed him in his notion that violence of language and ©weeping condemnations of the actions of public men are evidence of political sincerity. He is having, his fling, we suppose, because he realises that he has entered upon a hopeless campaign, but surely if he aspires to represent any section of the community in Parliament he must give some better proof of his capacity.- It is all very well to talk in heroics, but we are most of us common clay, and a I little' serious consideration of everyI day questions, the questions that are here and now, is required, pvep of the greatest politicians.”

THE NATIVE LAND QUESTION. The “Christchurch Press”, lias the iiO'llowing reference 'to the vexed question of Native lands:— The tangle of Native land laws, requires to be reduced to an intelligible system, so that any European buying or leasing Native lands may have a fair idea of what he is doing. Equally important, as we have pointed out, is the strengthening of the Native Land Court and the reorganisation of the Native Department. The selection of the Native Land Court judges lias, in more than one instance, been little short of a scandal, political considerations having obviously been allowed undue weight. As for the Native Department, it is hardly possible intemperate language to give an . adequate idea of its general inefficiency and chaotic condition.- That the Government made absolutely no- attempt to remove this blot on their administration before going to the country shows how absolutely insincere are their professions of anxiety to see the Native land question satisfactorily settled.

JOTTINGS. It is curious to note (says an exchange) tnat- more than one Canterbury candidate oil the Government side is putting forward tho fact mathe is well-to-do as an argument in favor of ' his election. JL>r. Thacker has announced that he is free from all worldly care or monetary considerations. “in fact, ho lias so much of this world’s goods that he felt he might as well bestow some of them whero they were most needed.” Now Mr. F. llowelL (a young man who is contesting Ellesmere against Mr. Heaton Rhodes and Mr. George Rennie, the accepted Government candidate) tells the elector,-* lie felt ho had enough of worldly goods to keep the wolf irom the door, and now ho deemed it his duty to try and help his fellow-men. What a lot wo snould hear about the domination of wealth if these gentlemen, happened to be,-. Opposition candidates, especially as their statements can only bo taken as suggestions that honorarium is of no consequence to them, -and may be devoted to public purposes. “It costs me more money to build upon a leasehold than upon a freehold,” said Mr. Moss, at Remuera. “Which of the Cabinet Ministers holds -a leasehold? None. Which one doesn’t hold a freehold? None. Why, even the Minister for Education, the great single tax advocate, owns freehold.”

We want good and patriotic Government, no matter what party is in power or out of power (says the “New Zealand Herald”), and we want a curb put upon the unlimited authority through which the country is pestered with legislation that it does not ask for, and refused administrative action upon lines plainly desirable. The “gagging” clause, in the Second Ballot Bill was a fair instance of the crying need of the day —for independent- and fearless members on both sides of the House.

Those people, who, like ourselves (remarks the “Dominion”) have unceasingly called public attention to the degradation of Parliament and to the conscienceless opportunism of the Government will find in the promise of a halt in the wild career of “Liberalism” as much satisfaction as in the belated vindication of their criticisms. We must sympathise with the unhappy Ministerial journals which will have to reconcile their statements that the Government has a great policy and a great- field of legislation awaiting its attention with the Prime Minister’s own announcement that his armoury is bare. All that Sir Joseph Ward can offer to the public is a Government full of juous hopes and noble aspirations, and bearing as a motto “‘Opportunity for all.” To this sad end lias come the reign of Opportunism. There will not, of course, be a cessation of the legislative machine. There will be sufficient occupation for many sessions to come in amending the slipshod laws of the past fifteen years. Mr. Moss, the Independent candidate for Parnell, does not believe in the cracking of the party Whip. “There will bo a distinct gain, in tlie opinion of -most of us, if this system of secrecy about the Government accounts is done away with, and if the assault on the freehold is stopped,” he declared, while speaking at Remuera. “And,” he added, “if a vote of want of confidence in the Government, on the ’ground that its administration is neither sufficient nor above suspicion, or that its assault on the freehold must be stopped, were moved, I should vote against the Government, but I don’t believe in turning out one Government just for the sake of putting in another party, without good and sufficient reason.