DEMOCRACY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 130, 4 June 1935, Page 12

DEMOCRACY.

ITS MACHINERY.

AM ELECTIVE EXECUTIVE?

REME&Y FOR CURRENT EVILS. (By MORTOX ALDIS.) (No. 4.) To seek a remedy for the evils of party government in the merging of all sectional parties in one so-called national one is to go from bad to worse; the way of escape lies in precisely the opposite direction. Whether the enforced and superficial unanimity of the dicta torist countries will last remains to be seen; but events both in England and Xew Zealand have made it plain that there is no place for a national party in a country with any degree of political freedom. The phrase "national party," is, indeed, a contradiction in terms; if it were national it would not be a party.

Anyone who really believes himself capable of formulating a policy that all honest and intelligent people must agree in supporting must combine a remarkably good conceit of himself with a childlike —not to say childish —innocence, and an utter blindness to the facts of human nature and human history. Wherever there is freedom of thought and speech there must be differences of opinion, leading to the formation of different parties. A political system that refuses to recognise this is divorced from reality and built on sham and pretence. It is, indeed, one of the main defects of our present party system that it only recognises this to such a very limited extent. To confine a man to a choice between three political parties :s just as absurd, and just as much an infringement of his freedom and an insult to hie intelligence, as it would be to insist on it that in religion he must be either a Eomaii Catholic or an Anglican or a Rationalist. What we need is not fewer parties, but more— and less party. Let those who agree in holding any political or economic faith have free scope to form a party to propagate it, without thereby forfeiting their liberty to oppose one another on other questions on which they may disagree. Let the parties thus formed, instead of wasting their energies in the ignoble struggle to seize and hold the Treasury devote them to the only legitimate activity of a political party, that of endeavouring to bring their fellow countrymen over to their way of thinking, with the assurance that thus, and thus alone, can they secure the enactment of the measures that they support; and let the administrative business of government be carried on by an executive committee elected by Parliament, presided over by a chairman with powers and functions analogous to those of the chairmen of other executives.

Parliament to Determine Policy. • The executive should include representatives of all ( numerically considerable sections in Parliament, which coxild be • ensured by holding the election under the single transferable vote system. Under this form of government, while the executive would have the right to initiate legifelation, it would have no monopoly, either theoretical or practical, of that right, and no power to block the discussion and enactment of measures introduced by members outside its ranks. It would be for Parliament to determine policy, by discussion and voting in which members would be under no compulsion to conceal their real opinions, or to vote otherwise than in accordance with them; and for the executive to carry out the policy so determined. Any member of the executive who could not bring himself to join in doing this would, of course, have to resign; but Ministers would not bo under any obligation to resign merely because they were opposed to a decision reached by Parliament. There would be no requirement of professed unanimity, and no collective responsibility; each Minister would be responsible for tha administration of his own department, and if he were censured by Parliament, that would bo no reason why his colleagues should resign. Example of Other Bodies.

There is nothing cither impracticable or novel in these proposals. A system on these lines has been in operation in Switzerland for many years past; but there is no need to go so far afield for examples. Whenever we combine to carry on any organised activity we adopt this method of government as a' matter of course; in practically all our voluntary associations — clubs, companies, societies of all kinds—and even in our local governing bodies. The government of the country, as a whole, is the sole exception; an exception which has nothing to recommend it in theory, ■Jind has failed to justify itself in practice.

The reform suggested should appeal alike to those of conservative and progressive leanings. It is widely recognised that radical changes in the structure of our society arc inevitable; and it should surely also be recognised by all, whether they anticipate those changes with hope or fear, that if their nature and extent are to be determined by legislative action, it is essential that it should be by a legislature genuinely representing the whole people, whoee members are free to discuss all proposals put before them on their merits, and to speak and vote on them according to their real convictions. It cannot be seriously pretended that we have such a legislature now. Under the existing system conservatives are faced with the danger that changes which they dread may be carried out without any real mandate from the people by astute politicians manoeuvring for party gains—it may be even by their own leaders seeking to "dish" their opponents; while progressives can have no assurance either that the support of a majority of the electors will give them a majority in Parliament, or on the other hand that a majority in Parliament is any proof that the majority of the electors are in sympathy with their fundamental objectives, or that if they do succeed in seizing the Treasury benches they may not in a few years' time be driven from them, and most if not all that they have accomplished undone.

With proportional representation and an elective executive, conservatives could rest assured that no change could be carried into effect unless it had the support of a majority of the electors,; and then only after a free discussion in which moderating md .conciliatory influences would no longer be stifled; and progressives that once they could secure the support of such a majority their proposals would be adopted, with little fear of their being afterwards discarded unless after a fair trial they proved unsatisfactory, •• ■

Urgently Needed Reform. I am convinced that the reform of our machinery of government is of all political reforms the most urgently and immediately needed, both as being the only means of making possible the effective carrying out of any other reforms that depend for their accomplishment on legislative action, and of giving free play to the forces that make for national progress and for higher ethical standards in our public lile, and also as offering the only hope of averting the peril that now menaces freedom and democracy. It is becoming more and more evident that the sham democracy under which we now live ie doomed, and that our choice must lie between a really democratic government and some form of dictatorship; and it may well be that the time allowed us in which to make that choice is drawing to its close.