PARTY GOVERNMENT

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 63, 11 September 1924, Page 9

PARTY GOVERNMENT

MR. HANAN'S PROPOSAL

AN ELECTIVE MINISTRY

OPINION IN THE HOUSE.

An "old friend," the Election of Ministers and Party Government Reform Bill, in the name of the Hon. J. A. Hanan (Invercargill), was discussed at length in the House of Representatives yesterday. Mr. Hanan moved for leave to introduce the Bill, and although it had not been circulated, members took for granted that its main principles were contained in the title, and spoke accordingly. ■

Mr. Hanan stated that there was a general desire for reform of the present system by the removal of some of the evils of party government. Everyone ■who- watched events in progressive communities realised' the necessity of changing the form of government 'to meet the conditions of the times. When there were only two parties m New Zealand there might .not have been so much ground for the measure, but with the development of-the three-party system .some change was needed to give stability to the situation.. New Zealand did not .wish to repeat the position'of England, which had a Government in office but not in power. ,If the group system developed in our Parliament there would be a Government without sufficient courage to initiate substantial measures of reform. Already there had appeared in the House a butter group, a wool group, and a wheat group. The Prime Minister: "And an antigambling group." ■ Mr. Hanan agreed, and added that his Bill, by providing for the election of Ministers, would secure a Government representative of the majority of the members. The House to-day was dominated by a one-man Government supported by party hacks. If Ihe system he suggested, were adopted. Parliament would regain the respect it had lost in the eyes of the country. REFORM AND' IMPROVEMENT Mr. T. K. Sidey (Dunedin South) said it could not bo denied that there was room for reform of the party system. The Prime Minister: "Room for improvement." , Mr. Sidey said one never saw a borough council conduct business on party linos. Voices: "Oh, don't you?" .Mr. Sidey said no effort was made to improve the present unsatisfactory state of things in-so far as the evils of party government were concerned. Mr._ G. W. Forbes (Hurunui) was complimentary to Mr. Hanan for again introducing a measure which he had not yet been able to have adopted. There was no doubt we were tending towards the group system. The three-party system showed the weaknesses of the pre sent Parliamentary system. No one' could say that the present Government was'elected by the votes, of the country. "Most decidedly it can," interjected the Prime Minister. . ! '."■-: Mr. Forbes said the Prime Ministei had been a benevolent despot. He had carried out his duties up to the present to the satisfaction of his party, but the speaker thought the condition of affairs at the present juncture was causing a good deal of dissatisfaction. The Prime Minister had been in for ten or twelve years. ■■■'', .-.--,. '■.■'.": .'■ The Hon. W. Npsworthy: "He will see you. out." : '."'. \ "I am not concerned," remarked Mr. Forbes. "We may all be. out." Mr. Forbes again congratulated Mr. Hanan on his Bill, but. admitted that he did not know what'-was in it. ;'■ (Laughter.) It" might-be the same Bill as was brought in last year, and perhaps the Prime Minister might agree to its going to; a Committee. .. ■ /■'/■ . The Prime- Minister: "I don't want to waste time." Mr. Forbes,remarked that the present state of affairs; at. Home -was unsatisfactory,; a minority Labour Government being in power. .".' '..■ ;'.-..-.. /Mr. Nosworthy:. "Kept there by the Liberals." -...■■. The Hon. D. Buddo (Kaiapoi) did not think the House was wasting time by discussing the Bill. An improvement in the present system was required. Mr. P. A. de la Perrelle (Awarua) agreed with the Bill. - WHAT IS IN HIS HEAD? "The hon. member for Hurunui has stated that he does not'know what is in the Bill," remarked Mr, D. G. Sullivan (Avon), "but our. trouble, is that we do not know what is in the head of the hon.: member for Invercargill—what he has in mind in introducing the Bill.'' (Laughter.) Mr. Sullivan foresaw difficulties arising in an elective Cabinet, where, say, .Mrl Massey and Mr.. Holland had seats, and where a proposal for the sale of the national endowment was submitted. Such ■ circumstances would create an "unhply row." He would like to learn how such a difficulty could be got over. _ If the dominant party in the House elected its own representatives to a Cabinet the position would not be much better than it is to-day- In his view, if they wanted to, improve the legislative system, they must give more power to the people, namely, tlie right to have a referendum on big questions. Mr. M. J. Savage (Auckland West), in pointing to tire- difficulties ho saw in the Bill, .remarked that it was by no means certain that if .the Labour Party was the dominant party in the House it would appoint Reformers to the Cabinet. (Laughter.) So long, as there was conflict in industry it would be reflected in ■Parliament. .. ■■ . - Mr. L. M. Isitt' (Christchurch North) disputed any assertion that the Labour Party represented all -the wage-earners. Because people did not adhere to the principles of the Labour' Party, that was not to say that they were unsympathetic with Labour generally. None 'could deny that there were evils attaching to' the party system, but it was when they tried to get wnat was a practical and definite remedy that the difficulty began. ' Mr.- H. Atmore (Nelson) said that throughout the world representative assemblies were finding'• it difficult to function. With the spread of education more parties would grow, up, and no one of them would have the executive authority. He believed the Bill to be a good one, and that it would be en dorsed by a majority of the people. Mr. P. Eraser (Wellington Central} said there were certain antagonistic economic interests in society, and there were intellectual forces which djjsired to advance as against others which did not want to progress. It was quite possible that the Liberals and R-eformers might unite, and if such' a happy state of •affairs could be brought about it would delight Mr. Isitt and other occupants of the Liberal benches. Mr. ■ Fraser said that the idea of an elective executive was once a plank in tho Labour. Party's platform, but ideas of political parties underwent transformation. There was' a difference between, local bodies .and Parliament insofar as party matters were concerned, because a city council was nine-tenths an administrative bod}', whereas a Parliament was a legislative body wholly. If the Rill could provide for a sane coalition of I lie Liberal and iielwm Partjwi; aud a, loir and eiiuilttble

distribution of portfolios, it would command the support of all parties in the House. He appealed to the Prime Minister to make the necessary overtures jo the Liberal Party, so that he might become the leader of a compact army. Ihen we can have a real fight," said Mr. Fraser, "although some of the Liberal members might not want to gd into the camp. -..; ' . ■■■-.- _The Leader of the Labour Party (Mr. H E. Holland) said lie opposed the iiill, as it was contrary to the principles on which he was elected. Mr.' Holland reviewed the evolution of political freedom in Britain from the days of Magna Charta to the advent of a Labour Government—"the best Govern>nent breat Britain has ever had." ' Jf Mr.,Hanan's Bill came into operation Messrs. Isitt and Witty' would be able to elect the Cabinet, as they kept the Government in office.' The proposal was impracticable. What happened in the National Cabinet days proved that that would be so. POLITICAL HUMBUG Replying to the discussion, Mr. Hanan said it was all political humbug for members to say they did not know what the bill contained. It was the . same Bill that he had introduced last session. In brief, it proposed the election of Ministers. It did not do away with party government, but sought to do away with many of the'abuses that existed under the party system. The Bill,was a development of the principle that 'the people should control the Legislature It enabled the people indirectly to elect the Executive of Parliament, giving the members of Parliament .who represented them.the right to say who should constitute the Executive of. th 0 day. Jt destroyed collective responsibility, and prevented Ministers from sheltering behind Cabinet or the Prime Minister for their blunders or incompetent administration. The Government had no ri^ht to deny the people the right to say how the Executive should be constituted He firmly believed that a reform such as that which he proposed would be realised sooner or later. "I even make this prediction, said Mr. Hanan, "that after the next election many men who do not look very kindly on this Bill at present will come to realise the necessity for a measure of this nature." The people were disgusted with the results of party government, and ; the misrepresentation that: took place, and if a referendum were taken the majority of the people of the country would support''the proposals put forward in his Bill. The Bill was read a first time.