Original Correspondence.

Clutha Leader, Volume XX, Issue 1003, 13 October 1893, Page 6

Original Correspondence.

PARTY GOVERNMENT.

(No. 7) TO THE EDITOR. SiR, — In Switzerland the members of the Executive are all on an equality. As the majority rules there is no necessity for any one member having a controlling power over the others. The President of the republic, who is elected yearly by the Assembly and who is simply a member of the Executive, presides over the meetings, but he has no more po^er than any other member. This is just as it should be. With us, however, the Premier is not only the official head but the guiding power in the Ministry. As onr Bystem requires that the Ministry should be unanimous in everything they do it is necessary that authority «hould rest somewhere, and it rests in the Premier. He selects his colleagues, and he can call on any colleague to resign. His colleagues therefore look on him as their chief, and there is a tendency on their. part to give way to his opinions. This is particularly the case when he is the man with most force of will in the -Ministry. When this happens it may almost be said that the country is ruled by one mau. Surely this is not a satisfactory position, and it is one that could not happen if the members of the Executive were all on a footing of equality. Equality in the Executive is therefore one of the things we should aim at. When a private member of the Swiss Assembly desires to have legislation on some subject he brings the matter before the Assembly by way of a motion. The motion may be agreed to as introduced or it may be agreed to in an amsnded form. The Executive drafts a bill to give effect to the views expressed iv the motion. In this way the bill is better prepared and more consistent with other legislation than it would probably be if prepared by a private member. There is also this advantage that the discussion ofthe subject before drafting the bill is of service to. ihe Executive in putting it into proper shape* The Executive, when the bill is prepared, introduce" ifc into the Assembly, giving at the same time their opinions upon it, and these •> have usually great weight with the Assembly. Further, every bill introduced by the Executive of • its own accord or to give effect to any resolution that has been passfed by the Assembly is referred to a committee. The committee, if not unanimous about the bill, must report in detail the whole of their proceedings regarding it. In tbii» way the Assembly has fully before it the - opinions of the men who have given the ~ measure full consideration It is admitted on all hands that a popular Assembly requires guidance and

control. We are presumed to enjoy these advantages by what is called Ministerial responsibility, or in other words Ministerial responsibility is presumed to secure to us good legislation and good administration. I shall nofc take up your time by going into particulars to s»hew that Ministerial responsibility is not nearly so. efficacious in promoting these advantages as it is often supposed to be, for everybody who has given any attention to the subject knows that neither our legislation nor our administration is anything to boast of. With an elected Executive there can be no doubt that our administration would be very much better than it is, because in electing an Executive we would have regard to ability to administer. At preseut this is not taken into account at all. The chief recommendation is prominence in debate or in obstruction. In Switzerland the Executive is elected, with special reference to administrative ability, and therefore in chat country public affairs are well administered. It has been said that an Executive in the nature of a committee for the management of public business would not be so able to counteract unnecessary and extravagant legislation as a responsible Ministry. The Swiss system, however, seems to compare favourably with responsible government even in this respect. There is -the check that private members cannot introduce bills but only motions. There is also the check that every bill is referred to a committee. And then ther t e is this great check that measures are much more likely to be considered on their merits than they are under our system. I presume also that under such a system each member would feel a keener sense of responsibility than he does at present. Ido not say that he would have the interests of the country more at heart, but I think he would feel his reponsibilities more. In speaking about Ministerial responsibility, I may refer to one great disadvantage connected with ifc as regards legislation. It is expected that all important legislation should be introduced only by responsible Ministers. Bnt the very fact that Ministers are supposed to be agreed on all measures they introduce prevents, them taking up and legislating upon many important subjects, especially social subjects. These are what are called open questions. On these open questions the Government can nsither initiate nor guide legislation. Anything that can be done at all with regard to many such matters can be undertaken only by private members. There are a number of social questions connected with labour that a Ministry largely supported by labour members and members returned in the interests of labour may introduce legislation upon. But there are other important social matters thafc no Ministry can touch, because they are not agreed upon them, and because the party they lead is not a party returned to support such matters. But this is nofc the worst of it, for the idea thafc it is the Ministry that should introduce all measures on important subjects prevents private members attempting to deal with such subjects, and prevents them also giving due consideration to the efforts of private members in this direction. They know well enough that there is very little chance of any such measure passing, and therefore they do not give it much attention. No objection of this kind could be taken under the system of an elected Executive, for then it wonld not be expected ' that ali important measures should emanate from the Ministry. The present system therefore is a great drawback to legislation of a social character, and this defect in our present system is likely to be more felt than it has been, because in the future social questions are likely to be more in evidence than they have been in the past. Although T have referred in terms of approval of the Swiss system, I do not go the length of saying that we should adopt it in every particular. The chief thing about it is the election of the Executive by the Parliament with security of tenure for the period of the Parliament. This is what we want, and if we had but this, other changes that are in accordance with it would be sure to follow. It has been said that we can scarcely expect any very decided -action, to be taken against party government by any Minister or by any leading men on the other side who may expect to be Ministers, because while they might be Ministers under the present system, they might not be under an elective system, aud also because any change of the kind must be in the direction of reducing the power of Ministers. I would nofc say this myself, as it would be a reflection on the patriotism of our public men. It is sincerely to be hoped that some person of influence will take up arms against this demon. If so, and if he carries on the war to a successful issue, he will perform a service to his country that ought to be held in everlasting remembrance. There are many phases of this large subject which I have not touched on. I hope, however, I have said enongh to induce those who have read these letters to give some attention to the subject. Any person who does this cannot fail to see that the system is essentially bad, and to be willing to do what he can to bring about a better state of things. If I have succeeded in influencing even a small section of the community against party government, I shall consider myself amply compensated for any trouble to which I have put myself in writing these letters. — I am, &c, James W. Thomson. Lakeside, Kaitangata, Oct: 11,1893.