The Press Thursday, May 15, 1930. Parliamentary Government.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19928, 15 May 1930, Page 10

The Press Thursday, May 15, 1930. Parliamentary Government.

The report in Taa Pwsss yesterday morning of Professor T. A. Hunter's address to the Australasian Association of Psychology and Philosophy summarised a merciless diagnosis of Parliamentary and political sickness. He found so much wrong and so little right that an alarmed reader might very well wonder how it is that the country bftara up With a political body so decrepit; and the answer is that Professor Hunter judges the system from a position too intellectual and abstract; He fails to make even the first allowance for it, that democratic government can be enjoyed only at the minimum price exacted by its inherent defects. The minimum price is heavy enough; but it is useless to complain about that, or to argue whether it is worth paying. It has to be paid and it will go on being paid. Mr Wells eaid years ago that he knew of " no " case for the elective, democratic gov* "eminent of modern States that can"not be knocked to pieces in five " minutes " —that is, no. rationally convincing oase; but the case is beyond argument, as the system is beyond destruction* We have to be satisfied with the fact that it works, in spite of its defects, and on the whole works astonishingly well. This does not mean, of course, that we ought not to be persistently critical and watchful. With social and other changes it can and does develop fresh defects, and the old ones tend to get worse. Professor Hunter is not by any means alone in being awaue how far this process has gone and in Crying that it should be stayed and reversed; but it is necessary, in pointing out the evils and dangers of our political case, to distinguish between what is new and OOTftblfl, or at least improvable, and what is inherent and has to be accepted. For example, Professor Hunter has the following passage, rhetorically very effective :• To give an elector a vote and then require that he exercise it in favour Of a small number of candidate* selected by the Party leaders, to promote a system that practically precludes the possibility of men standing as candidatesnflleis they are prepared, net only to affiliate themselves to one of the Parties of the day, but also to subordinate their judgment on matters of great social moment to that of a Putty whose efforts may be directed not to the welfare of the community, but to the preservation of office and its emote* meats, for the members of the Party, icsats most cunningly designed td prevent any veal direction of public policy by the people, further, the system of Party government within the House is a most effective method for preventing * free expression and a free vote ia maters of public import, But if wo ui« id have democratic electioh at all—and there is now no escape from it—we must take what goes with it. it makes inevitable the growth of political groups and their organisation! which, certainly, seeks to control public opinion, but can do so only by studying it, and which enforces Parliamentary discipline, but must always be ready to relax it. Democracy makes much of the individual in one way; it cannot bo helped if the individual counts for less than bis full value in Another. To quote Mr Wells again, " it is manifest that upon countless im* " portant public issues there is no Col- | "leotive will, and nothing in the mind " of the average man except tgijnk in- " difference." But these aro facta which it is idle to,discover and condemn to-day. Much more serious matters for criticism are weaknesses of recent growth in the Parliamentary system. There is, for instance, the fact that Parliamentary control of government is fast losing what effectiveness it has had. Business has been multiplied and complicated, until members have pot. the time, even if they have the ability, to master it as it passes before them. Bureaucratic encroachments have gone far, at once weakening Parliament and proving its Weakness. The principle of Cabinet's collective responsibility has been strained and broken in British politics, and in Hew Zealand it has become difficult to guess when a Minister is speaking subject to correction and when by the book/ It is undoubtedly time to consider how the Parliamentary system can be restored and Improved. Parliament can resume its lost rights and guard them better; it can find means of simplifying and contracting its business—for example, by fuller use of committees and expert and by working towards a desired Bill instead of on a prepared Bill; it can devolve upon local bodies some of the business which it at present scamps or bands over to Departments with a lust for centralisation. This and more can easily enough be done; but it is not the right beginning to attack the foundations on which the Parliamentary system rests, once and for all.

I ww agreed that the practice of studding the City with unsightly sale notice boards disfigured the streets. It was also admitted that the public display of these forests of notice boards gave n false impression of bad times and financial stringency, and lowered values. Finally, there was the point of view o£ the agents themselves, who realised that the employment of these boards made special difficulties when a sale took place, and that perfectly innocent vendors frequently found themselves involved in disputes between contending agents as to who was actually responsible for effecting the sale and entitled to the commission. The agreement to discontinue the use of sale boards applied only to occupied residential properties, and it was left to the individual agents themselves to do what they considered proper in the case of vacant sections, empty houses, and houses under construction. Now that the existing agreement has almost expired, it is to be hoped that the members of the Real Estate Institute will renew it for at least another twelve months. Although there are property-owners who think that the more notices they display the more likely they will be to find buyers, most people understand that the truth is the other way round. It must bo realised aJso by the agents themselves that the maintenance of a high standard of pi-ofessional dignity gives them a firmer hold on public esteem, and therefore more business.