PETTY POLITICS

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 221, 14 June 1930, Page 27

PETTY POLITICS

Parliamentary Debates

(Contributed by the New Zealand Welfare League.) It is said that the onlooker sees most of the game; this must be our excuse for criticising Parliamentary standards of debate.- Those who-, remember the. days of Grey, Atkinson, Ballance, Reeves, Rolleston, Seddon and others cannot help a sense of irritation over the pettiness of Parliamentary debates such as we witnessed last session, and indeed for many sessions past. At times like those we have been passing through, and which are before us, with grave financial, social and industrial problems, the electors look for leadership from those sent to Parliament. But instead of insight and guidance what have we had recently? Practically nothing but petty recriminations. When a more responsible member endeavours to deal with a subject seriously he has to run the gauntlet of heckling interruptions from his opponents—interruptions imputing insincerity, and often inexcusable personalities.

Debates often read as if members were in a chronic state of ill-temper—a large proportion of the speeches are really hustings speeches. If these were reserved for the hustings no one could object, but when they are delivered in the House they do not appeal to the public, who would prefer their representatives to concentrate more on the needs of the Dominion than on the question of again being returned to Parliament. Indeed, with some members, the subject under discussion takes second place to an endeavour to impress an outside audience.

With the big problems which any intelligent man can see looking ahead and in the face of the Prime Minister’s very frank outline of these, recently issued, something much more serious is required in Parliament than gibes about “minority representation,” insulting innuendoes against the personal character of an opponent, followed by “personal explanations,” inquiries and what not. Yet this is what was served up to the country last session. In the face of the present situation, it is to be hoped that we shall not have to witness such a pitiable waste of precious days and the consequent expense to the country as we did then.

Is it any wonder that the people are getting restless and demanding more constructive work on national grounds in the Jilace of so much wrangling over party differences? Electors who can see waste and inefficiency in State expenditure are marvelling because members of Parliament either do not seem to realise the facts or lack the courage to boldly attack them on sound lines in the country’s interest as a whole rather than allow petty local interests and “parish pump politics” dominate. To put things on a sound basis will require considerable courage on the part of members —courage to do. what they must know in their hearts is the right thing in the public interest, in spite of the fact that it may go against them at the next elections by diverting votes from those who place personal and local gain before the welfare of the Dominion.