The Dominion. TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 1910. LOCAL NEEDS AND NATIONAL INTERESTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 848, 21 June 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 1910. LOCAL NEEDS AND NATIONAL INTERESTS.

The comments of the Auckland newspapers upon Mr. Myers's election as member for Auckland East should make an interesting document for those who pay attention to the transformation of Parliament from a national assembly into a collection of local delegates. Mr. -Myers was neither a Government nor an Opposition candidate, ,yct 'he was warmly supported by the two Auckland dailies, one of which is an extreme supporter of the Ministry, while the other is ilominally opposed to the Government. His success vas a matter for rejoicing to.both these journals, and it is perfectly plain from their articles that their satisfaction arises from their conviction, doubt-less'well-foundcd, that the new member will look well after Auckland's interests. So far as general politics are concerned, nobody in Auckland, and neither of the Auckland papers, cared very much, if at. all, what Mr. Myers's opinions might be. Mr. Myers himself does not seem to have dealt with general politics more than perfunctorily, nor to have regarded as more than a formality the proclamation of opinions on questions in which Auckland has not a special local interest at conflict with other local interests. We are bound to say we do not blame the Auckland electors or the' Auckland papers. Parliament being, as we have often pointed out, a mere tourney ground upon which all kinds of local and class interests fight furiously each for its own hand, Auckland East not unnaturally placed the defence of its interests above all other questions. What we do blame, and what it is the highest duty of all true friends of tho nation t.o attack, is the system that makes this sort of thing neccssary. We have, often dealt with the matter, but it is of such great importance that it cannot bo kept too prominently before the public. —

New Zealand is of course not singular in being afflicted with the blight of parochialism in politics. We have' several times in the past year called attention to the anxiety which a similar condition of affairs is causing to the leading statesmen of France; and we may express our satisfaction, in passing, that our evening contemporary gave an i'articlc to tho same subject a few days ago. America is also beginning to realise the injury suffered by the public purse and tho public conscience under any system , that leads ■communities and their Parliamentary representatives to place local needs above national interests. An experienced member of the Federal House Committee on Appropriations recently expressed the opinion that "there was no genuine popular demand for economy, and that, so far as he had observed, every constituency expected its agent in Congress to .do what ho could for its benefit regardless of the larger interests of tho nation. The most successful legislator at Washington was he who fought, bled and died witli the greatest persistency for 'the old, flag and "an appropriation'." So serious has this degraded view of politics bccomc that tho recent action of a certain locality in condemning an appropriation made for it was considered of enough importance to call for comment from tho leading newspapers. A sum of 30,000 dollars had been voted for a harbour project in Rhode Island upon which nearly 200,000 dollars had beep spent by tho Federal Government in defiance of adverse reports both from tho army engineers and a commission representing the State of Rhode Island. The Providence Journal, instead of welcoming tho money as evidence of the fidelity and capacity of the Rhode Island representatives, made this sharp protest : We are supposed to bo acclaiming our representatives in Congress,for their alertness in obtaining a fraction of the fiftytwo millions for Block Island. We aro pictured as grateful for their exertions in inducing Congress to ignoro certain circumstances, which put tho appropriation in jeopardy. These circumstances are, briefly, that the report of every qualified authority condemns the Great Salt Pond project as useless; that tho Federal and Stato Governments have already wasted too much money on it, aud that' tho whole procedure lias been a political job from the beginning. This, the New- York Tribune says in an editorial article, on May % "may scandalise the parochial school of patriots, but it will encourage those who hope to see, the spirit of localism in Congress moderated by a growing spirit of nationalism." ' One need not be astonished that other countries resemble New Zealand in this deplorable development of representative government. What should appeal as an astonishing fact to patriotic New Zcalanders who love their country and would have it ,i fine country for their children and children's children is the fact that whereas in other countries leading newspapers and public men of all political shades of opinion aro attending to the evil, in this country practically only one side will do anything to bring about a public realisation of the evils of a system under which national inter--aro thrust aside. We have at various times quoted tho London Spectator's trenchant criticisms of "roads-and-bridges" politics. The London Nation, at the opposite pole in politics, is equally impressive in its warning against allowing sectional interests of any kind to take precedence in Parliament over national interests. Discussing a curious proposal that Parliament should be made a House of representatives of different trades and professions, it points out that a system of little parties "each working closcly and avowedly for its own hand, and forming temporary coalitions upon log-rolling principles, would bo a strange way of purifying politics." This is the system that works the allocation nt public works expenditure in New Zealand. What tho Nation says of entrusting political power to a delegacy of trades is true of entrusting political power to a delegacy of localities: The public good, "rcspnblica," would bo dissolved into a number of sepa/ate and frequently-conflicting private gifods, the supposed gain or welfare of the several trades. Such a Government would . . . certainly degenerate into a Ciovernment by "pulls," the richest and best organised of interests tyrannising- over the feebler and the smaller ones. For the present those members of Parliament, who object, to the system- and long for truly national ad-

ministration and legislation, have no choice but to work to protect their constituoncics from being robbed in the scrimmagc for public funds. We trust, however, that they will at the same time fight for the establishment of healthy conditions, which would consist of placing the allocation of public funds beyond the reach of manipulation'for party purposes.