The Lyttelton Times. THURSDAY, APRIL 21, 1887.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 8149, 21 April 1887, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. THURSDAY, APRIL 21, 1887.

The criticism the Opposition has devoted to the Government during the recess is more convenient for recessional speaking than useful for Parliamentary practice. During the recess it is easy and pleasant to hang out the Freetrade banner, to insist upon the immediate cessation of borrowing, to denounce the “ seizure ” of the Sinking Fund as dishonest, to profess a readiness to die rather than submit to a single penny of extra taxation. Having said his virtuous say, each worthy member of the Opposition gets his vote of confidence from a delighted audience, and there the matter ends. But in Parliament it is different. There work has to follow words. And how are such words to be made good? The Opposition will no more dare to refuse its consent to borrowing, and to increase the taxation than.it will think of flying. To restore the Sinking Fund to the old footing will be its last thought. Diminution of Departmental expenditure it will not insist upon to an extent sufficient to restore the Financial equilibrium. Education and Defence it will not propose to reduce on any terms. Then what can the Opposition do ? They have a saving clause, which Mr Montgomery, amongst others, used very well the other day at Akaroa, when he ended his profession of faith by declaring that he would borrow for “ reproductive works,” and submit, in case of “ absolute necessity,” to increase of the taxation. But, with that saving clause, the Opposition destroys the ground under its feet. Retrenchment, cessation of borrowing, no increase of taxation, any of these would made good cries to go to the country with. But the Opposition will not have them at any price. They prefer to find capital in the administration of the Government. They would like to prove the Government extravagant, but none of them can get beyond Mr Montgomery’s statement that, when he got back from Home last year, he saw that the Treasurer had advocated a wild policy. But Mr Montgomery’s idea of the Treasurer’s intentions, does not go far towards proving the actual extravagance of the Government as a whole. In the same way they declare that the Government would, but for Sir Julius Yogel and his friends, destroy all security of property by their Radicalism ; and that, but for Sir Robert Stout, the Education system would suffer cruel destruction at their hands. Wherever they turn in their desire to find bad intentions, they find saving clauses. The deficit does not please them any better, or offer them more chance of profit. For if the Government had been reckless in borrowing and wasteful in administration, if the Government had not kept off the weight of the Sinking Fund, the deficit would now be vastly larger. The proof that the Government is able and stable is the smallness of the deficit. How then can the Opposition make good their threat against the “ men who have brought us to this pass ? ” The position is most favourable for the Government. Tbe quality of the Opposition criticism is a sign of the absence of dangerous cohesion. It is the time for a bold Financial policy. A bold comprehensive programme of equilibrium, if pressed with the necessary skill and firmness, must be successful. Its success will mean the revival of the public credit. In this connection Major Atkinson has just made a speech which shows a practical grasp of the situation and a resolute acceptance of the duty of joining, undisturbed by “ cries,” in the work of adjusting the finances of the Colony. In these respects it is in strong contrast to the post-sessional speeches of the rest of the Opposition. In view of such a speech from the Opposition leader, we may hope that the important work of Financial adjustment has a clear field before it.