The Dominion. MONDAY, JUNE 8, 1908. MINISTERIAL RETICENCE.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 218, 8 June 1908, Page 6

The Dominion. MONDAY, JUNE 8, 1908. MINISTERIAL RETICENCE.

No argument is required to convince the public that the coming Parliamentary session cannot be allowed to pass without a very drastic alteration in the Arbitration Act. Mr Millak "may reasonably' contend that last year, when'he withdrew his amending Bill, he could not have anticipated the impending outbreak of the strike fever. No such excuse will bo available this year for any further postponement of legislative remedy for an intolerably evil state of things. The .Governmenti must be fully aware of the importance of this .question, and of the universality of the desire for the earliest possible amendment of the law. It must be aware, too, that the public has been educated out of its habitual neglcct of the fundamentals of political proposals, and converted into a jury of keen-eyed critics in this connection. Since that is the case, it is surprising that the Government still leaves the public in the dark on some vital points as to the shape which .the amendments will take. In Great Britain thought, long and careful, precedes tho introduction of Government Bills, and the British public can usually rely upon it that a Government Bill, whether it is good or bad in tendency, .13 at any rate clear and definite, and free from inconsistencies and, the "'flaws " that are the established characteristic of New Zealand Bills and Acts. In this country it is the. exception to find a new Bill fully-fledged. Our doctrinaires are in too great haste to alldw their proposals the proper period of incubation, and Parliament's ; chief work is not the settlement of principles, but the elimination of as many gross errors and absurd and unjust proposals as possible. There was never a proposal calling more urgently for the sunlight of public discussion than the proposal to amend an Act which, as at present administered,' and in the prcscncci of the Government's opinions about its provisions, inflicts the gravest injustice upon one class of the community without any compensating advantage in the way of preserving industrial pcaco. Yet Minister after Minister has made speech after speccli, and the public is still absolutely ignorant of tho 'details of .tho new Bill, llemombbririg the

innumerable examples of chaos produced by the hasty fabrication of untested and undiscussed innovations, the public cannot look forward to the new measure with any great degree of confidence. The Prime Minister talks unceasingly of "a law that would avoid the conditions created under the existing Act," but ho does not tell us what this law is to be. His unending professions, in long, vague speeches, of the highest intentions carry as little conviction to the public, and sound as mockingly hollow, as his declaration that " the untrammelled administration of justice was the greatest bulwark they had." Surely the Prime Minister had better talk about anything rather than " the untrammelled administration of justice." The applause could not have been wholly free from irony that greeted his statement in Dunedin that " if they had a system of administration of justice capable of being stopped or interfered with by any Government in power, all ho could say was that it would be a bad day for the country if that should come about." It has come about, and it is a bad day for the country. As it is obvious that the Government, if sincerc, has nothing to lose, and all td gain, by exposing its proposals to the wholesome air of public discussion, the remarkable secrecy in which Ministers are-wrapping themselves can only be interpreted as evidence of some intention not suspected by she public, or in tho alternative that. they have no remedy to offer.