The Dominion. FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1909 HARBOUR BOARD REPRESENTATION.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 597, 27 August 1909, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1909 HARBOUR BOARD REPRESENTATION.

:; The Harbour Board did not cover itself'; with glory yesterday by its treatment of the important and difficult problem of representation, The problem, as wo have said, is a most difficult one. At the best the allocation of control decided upon could hot be moro tliari a general approximation to the ideally equitable arrangement. There ig no excuse, however, for the atfclt'tid6 which Several members of th 6 Hoard took up whefl discussing the recomtteridatiofls of the Wharves and Accounts Committee.' Member after member dilated upon the rights of the Various claimants for a share ih the government of the harbour, and theii wound up by making the dost of election the paramount consideration. Tha Chdifrtian, for example) after committing himself to the pHftclpio that everyone who has the Parliivmeßtary, franokiw should have a

voice in the Board elections, Baid that he b did not see how the Parliamentary fran- | chise could bo adopted in the country jj districts "without an expense that would not be warranted." Me. Fletcher's rea- n son for. wishing'the Wellington suburbs j to be treated as part of the Hutt district t was, not that the interests of Miramar o are moro identified with those of C Lower Hutt than with the interests of c . Wellington, but that his scheme would ' result in "a considerable saving in the j cost of election." Mr. Boston went a e great deal further. Apparently he docs i not' recognise that there is anything' like I a principle at all involved in representa- f tion on public bodies.- That, at anyrate, f is the only conclusion that can bo drawn '] from his statement that he is "prepared ' to support the use of the municipal roll, ( solely on the ground: of expense." We | wonder what kind of government this I country would have if this stupid short- 1 sightedness were the common way of ' looking at public questions. ' A question of much greater importance, however,, was raised by the Chairsman's. advocacy of the Parliamentary franchise as the basis of the board's elections. He said that he believed that this basis would; eventually be adopted, and "he could not see why a man who was fit to vote for a member of Parliament should not be regarded as , fit to vote for a member of a Harbour Board./' In this view he was supported by Messrs. Fletcher and Bolton, and we have little doubt, that he has the support also of a very large section of the, pub- . lie. It is a view, however, which, however plausible it may seem, is really antagonistic to securing sound government in Harbour Board affairs, and the arguments J, against it are overwhelmingly ■ strong. As Me. Mi Cohen pointed out, to confer on every adult the right to vote at Harbour Board elections would lead to the election of men "not so much for their business capacity as for their genoral popularity, or their'willingness to make concessions to certain interests." Otlier'arguments of tho most convincing character were advanced by 'Mr 1 . J. G. Harkness in his very sound Speech. He pointed out that fitness to vote'at a Parliamentary election by no means implied fitness to vote at a Harbour Board election, because a Harbour. Board has to deal with, business; interests, and a Parliamentary elector ..who" understands/jpblitical.issues may not understand business problems. He suggested a likeness between .the/Harbour Board and a great private • business, and we think the analogy a good one. To give, tho general : public a voice in the management of the' . Harbour Board is not very different from giving the goneral puulic a voice in the election of the directorate of ' a large private business So long as the ■' local government b6ards are _ used;as ■ training grounds for Parliament by men . who have no greater; ambition! than to obtain a- seat, in the House, the idea .that the. Boards should be elected by the geni eral_ public will be pushed; on. Where, however, are'we to stop ? ■ The day 1 appears to be coming when the nape of democracy will be invoked .to secure : that every elective body of a public character 1 musji be elected on the Parliamentary ; franchise. 1 It is no longer considered no-, , cessaryi apparently, that a person Must , have responsibility Ijeforo being granted \ a share in control. Pushed to its logical ' conclusion this I, "democratic" 1 principle would result in the election of the judges • and magistrates by . popular vote. No f: doubt that too will coflie some day. While it is not difficult to understand I why this dangerous idea finds favour with cor'tain members of tho Board, we I cannot imagine why a strong stand was I not taken against the perpetuation of - the, system of. Government nominees.^ • Members appear to object to .the system, ' but .apparently believe that it is hopc--1 less to. oppose; the Government in., the matter.; Why .is it hopeless? An,d why, • holding the opinions that they do, did ; not the ,members of the Board take up a definite. attitude of oppositioni ". The. 3 Government is not all-powerful.' It is - ho longer able to insist as strongly, as of 1 old on its indofonsible dominations of local government. : What would have .happened had the municipalities meekly bowed their heads to'the Tramways Bill? 1 Wo should have had established the principle that' tne State is naturally entitlkl to exercise unlimited power: over _the •management and policy of municipal f undertakings; and in a very few years,it would have, been as difficult to' evict'the: Government as it has been in the case of the Harbour The municipalities j ; did not meekly submit to the Governi! meht's proposals, 'Such a vigorous protest was made that the Government was glad, to withdraw tho . obnoxious measure. The •' Government has no greater right to a share in the control of the ,Harbour x Boards than it has to a share of the control of tho Wellington tramways. The 3 Arguments which routed'the Ministry in i, the. case of. the tranlwdys are valid in )f the case of the' Harbour Boards, and we io hope yet to see some strong action taken ri against what is nothing but an impudent presumption by the Government on 1 a tho forbearance of the local publics.