MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVIII, Issue 138, 11 June 1917, Page 3

MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY.

A NEW INTERPRETATION. - (Special Correspondent.) r WELLINGTON, June 8. The statement made by the Hon. G. W. Russell in Christchurch to the effect that the Department and not the Minister is responsible for the restricted train service is being discussed with much animation here. Though many curious stories had been in circulation implying tiiat the Hon. W. H. Herries was ■not entirely in accord with the policy of the executive heads of his Department, it. was left to the Minister of Internal Affairs, when presiding over.a meeting of members of Parliament called to protest against this policy, to suggest that he docs not exercise control over the management of the railways. Just how he regards his collrfgue's solicitude on his- behalf no- one so far lias had sufficient courage to ask. Doubtless Mr. Russell spoke with the very best intentions, meaning to save Mr. Herries from the wrath of his disgruntled Christchurch critics, but his words were not happil}' chosen, and they easily might convey to the public a wholly wrong conception of the meaning and purpose of ministerial responsibility.

Mr. Russell himself appears to hare, been at the moment a little hazy as to the true constitutional position. Speaking , of his responsibilities as a member of the Cabinet and his responsibilities as the representative of the people, lie said when he found hia duty as a Minister conflicting with his duty a3 a member of Parliament he would be prepared to "go out"—to resign his portfolio. That was admirable so far as it went, but it did not go quite far enough. A Minister cannot With any propriety eit in judgment upon his colleagues or upon any one of them while he remains within the Cabinet. He must accept full responsibility, not only for the administration of the departments he controls, but also for the policy of the Government to which he belongs. That' is the basic principle of Cabinet rule, and the only possible alternative to collective ministerial responsibility is the elective executive of which the Social Democrats are dreaming.