The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ABE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1893.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIV, Issue 223, 20 September 1893, Page 4

The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ABE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo.

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1893.

Tor tho c.iuao that lacks assistant)!), Tor tho mong that needs resistance, l'er the l'utara in ihs distance, And ilis good that wo can ao.

The threatened vote of want-of-confL dence, in the closing days of the session, over the Government EaJiway Bill, was averted yesterday by Mr Rolleston's withdrawal of his amend' ment. The-Bill was then allowed to

go to the vote as a non-party question,

and the second reading was carried by a majority of eight. The necessity for dealing with this matter during

the present session arises from the fact that the Act under which the Commissioners tvere appointed expires in February next, and the management, unless other provision is made meanwhile, would then lapse to the Government. Ministers might have allowed the problem to solve itself in this way, treating the Bill passed five years ago as an experiment which Parliament had not chosen to renew. They have preferred, however, to take the House into their confidence.

The circumstances under which the Government Bill comes up for consideration disprove two assertions which are persistently promulgated by its opponents. It has been said that the Premier nmply desires to increase the Government power and patronage, and that the question has been brought forward for electioneering purposes. The facts are, that Mr Seddon, five years ago, at a time when he had not the smallest prospect of obtaining office, opposed the withdrawal of control over the railway service from Parliament ; and since he became Minister of Public Works, he has never ceased to give expression to his views, not merely in speeches, but by the introduction of Bills to change the constitution of the system of management. The expiration of the engagements of the Commissioners before Parliament, in the ordinary course, will again assemble, leaves the Premier no

alternative but to ascertain the feeling of the people's representatives on this subject and press for a solution of the problem ; this he has done on nonparty lines.

When the Bill creating Eailway Commissioners was introduced five years ago, we opposed it on the ground that the principle underlying the proposal was radically vicious. There should be no dealings with the national revenue without direct responsibility to Parliament, and strict, detailed scrutiny of every item of expenditure. The present system of railway management practically withdraws three, quarters of a million pounds of public money annually from Parliamentary control, and places its administration at the disposal of a Board who are. virtually irresponsible to the people or their representatives. If such a system has not resulted in great abuses, corruption and rottenness, it is because the men administering it are very much better than the system, In this respect we believe we have been fortunate. The three Railway Commissioners, although not supervised by an expert imported from England, have done tolerably well—very much better than the same system, with an expert receiving £4,000 a year, succeeded in Victoria, from which we borrowed the idea. In Victoria the irresponsible control has long been superseded, and there is no political party in that colony prepared to stand by it.

When the country decided that the non-political control should have a trial, we took up the position that the men entrusted with its execution ought to receive fair play. For that reason, we have deprecated attacks on the Commissioners, and consider that their administration, on the whole, has been such that we should regret to see the country lose their services. On these grounds, we were opposed to Mr Seddon's first proposals for changing the constitution of the Board.

The Bill which the Government have introduced this session, however, is of a very different type from its predecessors. It merely makes a Minister of the Crown one of (our Commissioners, holding the office of Chairman with the usual deliberative and casting vote, but otherwise having no power over the detailed administration of the service. There is, it is true, a right of veio, pending the submission ot any question at which the Commissioners and Cabinet are at issue, to Parliament, but this would, of course, only be exercised, if exercised at all, in a great matter of policy, and is a very proper provision. The real manageagement of our railways would still vest, as at present, in a Board of experts. The Chairman would keep the Commissioners in touch with the responsible Ministers of the Crown, and become their interpreter to Parliament. This seems so happy a compromise and solution of ihe existing difficulty, that we shall be very much surprised if the supporters of [be system of management by a Board of Commissioners do not accept it. There are undoubtedly a great many members who would go very much further and support Sir Robert Stout in re-establishing undivided Ministerial control. Even among those who are generally favourable to the Commissioners—of whom Mr Meredith, M.H.R., who spoke in their defence in the House last night, is one—there is a feeling that some change is necessary. Mr Meredith voiced a widely prevalent sentiment in the country when he declared that " The expenditure on the management of our railways at present was -£729.000, which was an enormous sum ; that the Kaiiway Depaitment should not be a close corporation, and that the youth of every class and station should have an opportunity of entering that department. It was not fair that only Wellington youths should be admitted into that department. Parliament ought to have some control in the management of railways and a voice, in the expenditure of such a large amount of public money." But these views, unquestionably just as they are, can never be given effect to so long as Parliament insists upon the maintenance of a bureaucratic system of management, with its centre at Wellington—governed and controlled absolutely by officials whose sympathies and interests are alike dominated by Wellington influences.