THE "MORE MINISTERS " MOVEMENT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 294, 5 September 1908, Page 4

THE "MORE MINISTERS " MOVEMENT.

0-r- ' Yesterday's discussion in the House upon the alleged need for more Ministers was obviously a pre-arranged affair, foi all that it arose out of an innocentlooking observation by Mr. Ell upon the Town Boards Amendment Bill. Nobodj can read the speech of the Prime Ministeb or those of Mr. Laurensou and Mr. M'Nab, who had primed themselves with statistics and with carefully-prepared pleadings, without feeling that' the Government had arranged to give anothei fillip to the agitation for an enlargement of the Ministry. The discussion ■ proceeded along the familiar lines. We had the old cry of overworked Ministers, the old plea for assistance to save the lives of the Premier and his colleagues, the old . staunchness of the " true blues " whe will not hear a word against their pooi chieftains. The case' against the appointment of new Ministers is as simple as it is strong, and it was stated with refreshing emphasis by Mr. Massey. The talk about overwork is v in the first place : quite absurd. How can Me. M'Nab suggest that the work of Ministers has • increased enormously, when he is able tc find time to compile and edit those fine and valuable " Historical Records " for which he will be moro gratefully remembered than for any of his Ministerial performances? How can Sir Joseph AVake talk about labours past physical endurance when he can find time to attend junketings' all over the country? During the last recess the whole Ministry was for the greater part of the time absent from headquarters on' electioneering business. As Mr. Massey put it, "if there was a post office or a little school or a bridge or a twopenny-ha'penny road tc be opened Ministers were to be found thcro electioneering for all they were worth." Even if there were anything in the plea of over-work, tho remedy would be the abandonment of the vicious system, inherited from Mr. Seddon, of ■Ministerial interference with tho details that are the work of the Departmental heads. If, irNAB contends, it is "absolutely essential that'' Ministers should go into the details of their Departments," it is absolutely essential that the Departmental officials should bo dismissed as incompetent or untrustworthy. Of course it is not at all essential that tho Minister should be seized of every petty detail, or that he should personally reply to every Tom, Dick and Harry who writes for information. Tho practice of maintaining a direct connection between " the Minister " and tho constituent may be of great service in winning votes, but it makes for bad administration. Mb. M'Nab " asked the House to imagine what tho farmers of the country would think if they asked tho Minister about somo intimate detail and found that he knew nothing about it. Supposing- lie replied that he did not go into matters of detail like that? Administration of that kind would not be tolerated." What stronger criticism could there be of the methods of the Government than this naive confession that if the Minister dared to act as a Minister and not as an anxious servitor of the voter the voter would consider himself insulted ? If Ministers followed the dignified traditions of; say, Great Britain, New Zealand could manage with a smaller Cabinet, and obtain a more efficient administration. Thero arc eight Ministers in New Zealand. In New South Wales, with a population one-third greater, there are only eight Ministers with portfolios, and in Victoria, with much the same population as New South Wales, only seven. If the ratio of Ministers to population were the same in Britain as in New Zealand, thore would be 320 pairs of legs under the Cabinet table. It is clear enough that the Government, in defiance of all the facts that we have quoted, is anxious to enlarge its channels of patronage, and to reward or placate some of its supporters at tho public expense. -The public may with advantage examine tho candidates at the forthcoming elections as to their opinions upon such a bare-faced job.