A POLITICAL CONTRAST.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 473, 3 April 1909, Page 4

A POLITICAL CONTRAST.

We have dealt elsewhere -with the general question of the Government's retrenchment proposals. There is one aspect of them, however, which calls for special notice for its contrast with the famous scheme of retrenchment set forth by Sm Harry Atkinson in his Financial Statement of 1887. Nothing can better illustrate the decay of Ministerial ideals, and the complete disappearance of principle and sincerity from tho work of government, than a comparison between the circumstances and character of Sir Joseph Ward's generally-useful policy with the policy of Sir Harry Atkinson. The Stout-Vogel Ministry had attempted to meet the very serious financial position that had been developing by a scheme to raise additional taxation, and had sustained a defeat. The appeal to tho country resulted in a verdict against tho Government, the electorate having very clearly shown that while it insisted on a restoration of financial stability, it required that economy and retrenchment should be the means of bringing about the desired end. Sir EonsHT Stout resigned on October 8, 1887, and Sib Haiiev

Atkinson formed a Ministry and brought down his Budget on November I—a1 —a Budget based on his recognition of "the firm determination of tho country for retrenchment." "How," he asked, "if possible without further taxation, are revenue and expenditure to be balanced ?" Something more was needed, he went on, to restore confidence than mere trivial economies. Just as is the case today, the country's troubles then had "arisen in a great mcAsure from a toolavish expenditure, more especially of borrowed money." The public was not' at that time a drugged and demoralised public, and the politicians, whether they were wise or unwise, wore at any rate sincere and straightforward. It was quite natural, therefore, that Sir Harry Atkinson should have applied the pruning-knife first to tho salaries of Ministers. The legislative expenditure, he said, was "undoubtedly a question of some difficulty, but in our opinion a considerable reduction in the legislative expenditure ought to be made, and, if made, that and the reduction of Ministers' salaries will tend more than any argument to producc in the minds of the people of the colony not only a conviction of our sincerity in this question of retrenchment, but also of the necessity for retrenchment generally." Perhaps the public, influenced by a dozen years of government for party ends and taught to regard political principles as mere strings of platitudes, may see nothing to comment upon in the fact that Sir Joseph Ward has no intention of making the Ministry share in the sacrifices which its misdeeds, and the misdeeds of its predecessor, have made essential to financial stability. But on the whole wo think that the public has not utterly lost its sense of what is right in politics, and that it will appreciate the sharp contrast between the ideals that guided the statesman of 1887 and the ideas that govern the politician of 1909. Sir Harry Atkinson reduccd tho Prime Minister's salary from £1750 to £1000— he cut down his own salary by the greatest percentage of all. Ho reduced tho salaries of his colleagues from £1250 to £800; he reduccd the number of- paid Ministers from seven to six; ho reduced the limit of Ministers' travelling allowances from £1500 to £1000; he reduccd tho salaries of members of Parliament from £210 to £150. In short, he behaved with a quixotism which his latter-day successor does not merely avoid, but apparently does not even give a thought to as a possible policy. He cherished the idea, and carricd it out, that in a timo calling for self-sacrifice, tho headmen should set an example to the rank and file. Since 'his day the Liberal Government has increased the Prime Minister's salary to £1600, the salary of the Minister for Bailways to £1300, and the salaries of all the other Ministers to £1000 each—and the only changes it has ever contemplated have been in the direction of further raids on the Treasury.

Having cut down his own and hiß colleagues' salaries by £3430 a year, Sir Harry Atkinson proceeded to effect economies in the Civil Service. At that time the persons in tho pay of tho Government, excluding the police, the military forces, and country postmasters, numbered 7163, and their salaries aggregated £1,004,273. Of these 5862 were either weekly-wage men, or men receiving salaries 'hot exceeding £150 a year. Tho Government proposed to make no material alteration here. There was to be a reduction in numbers, however, the total effect of which was to be a saving of £252,550. It was proposed to classify the Civil Service, limiting the number in cach class, and a Bill was to be introduced to set up a Civil Servicc Board through which all appointments and promotions would be made. "A cadet," so the Pro'micr stated tho sound principle behind this Bill, "must be able to look forward to the servicc ho enters as a profession, and one in which his advancement will depend on his capacity, character, and attention to his duties, and not upon the favour of the Minister of the day." It is neglect of this sound doctrine that is at tho root of the present trouble. In 1888 Sir Harry Atkinson was able to report a saving of £233,097. We may note, as a pbint of present interest, that the reform programme included a change in the administration of the railways, which then, as now, wero showing the evil cffccts of political control. The Government accordingly proposed "a non-political Board of Management" as tho means of bringing about a large increase in tho net profits. Tho difference , between the spirit of Sir Harry Atkinson's policy and that which Sip. Joseph Ward has announced is well worthy of attention. Worthy of attention, too, is this prophetic passage in the Atkinson Budget:

But when tho work we are now proposing to do has been dono to the satisfaction of tho House, if it is not to bo again undone, it will bo necessary that far greater restrictions should be placed on the Government of the day than is tho case at prer-ont. Vigorous retrenchment is effected by owe Government in times of depression, they r-o replaced by auothor Government, and much of tho work they havo done ; if times aro a Jittlo nitre prosperous, or if a more sanguine view of the prospect is taken, is undone by their successors.

Politics in New Zealand have drifted far from the old moorings of sincerity and honour. The Government does not even appear to be conscious that its own bad career and that of its predecessor stand condemned by its presont anxiety to repair in part the evil which it has created.