CAPTAIN BUSSELL ON THE LATE SESSION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVIII, Issue 11462, 28 December 1897, Page 4

CAPTAIN BUSSELL ON THE LATE SESSION.

As, the leader of the Opposition was for some reason not in his place in the House when the “washingup ” debate of the session took place on the Appropriation Bill, he has been afforded an opportunity, through the medium of a newspaper interviewer, of publicly stating his general opinions and conclusions regarding the recent parliamentary session, and at the same time of throwing some light on the question of the leadership of the Conservative Party. It may be remembered that, in the course of the debate referred to, the Premier twitted the Opposition with having three leaders. This was partly apropos to Mr Greorge Hutchison taking up for the nonce the role of leader and giving the Conservative summing-up of the session, and was partly based upon the knowledge that, since Mr Eolleston’a reappearance in the House, his counsels and methods have, to a large extent, dominated the party. Captain Bussell’s remarks on the leadership of the party suggest that the temporary transfer of the power into the hands of the member for Biccarton is intended to become permanent. There is in them that note of self-depreciation, and that eulogy of his colleague’s generosity, loyalty, and mastery of party tactics, which usuallj r accompany, an act of abdication, and which seem utterly disproportionate to a temporary transfer of leadership for a brief recess. It has been patent to all observers that Captain Bussell’s leadership of the Opposition was a half-hearted thing from the start, and this has been more than ever apparent during the session that has just closed. Although the leader of the Opposition, in his “ retiring ” mood, throws upon Mr Eolleston the. credit, or

discredit, of inspiring Conservative tactics during the past three months, he expresses unqualified approval of the methods employed and the results achieved by the Opposition Party in Parliament. Captain Russell is, in fact, entirely satisfied with the doings during the session of the party • “ whose first duty is to oppose,” He pleads guilty to wilful obstruction on the question of the constitution of Select Committees; all the rest was merely “ careful consideration and criticism,” and the throwing out of certain measures, such as the Old Age Pensions and Master and Apprentice Bills, was benevolently designed to “ give the country an opportunity of considering” them. Now, it must be within the knowledge of Captain Bussell that not one of the policy Bills that were rejected owing to the exertions of the Opposition was an absolutely new measure. The two named by him had been before the public for many months—one of them for three years, in one shape or another—and the country had fully considered them before the general election, and had pronounced a decided opinion in their favour. If they were, in the shape they were introduced, “ crude and ill-advised,” it was the duty of the 0 pposition to help to make them workable. What was the net result of the “ careful consideration and criticism ” given to the Old Age Pensions Bill by the House? Largely at the instance of Captain Russell and his followers, the Bill was sent to the Council in such a confused shape and at such a late stage that the Upper Chamber felt justified in abandoning as hopeless the work of dealing with it. The “ universal opinion ” in the country which we take to be Captain Russell's way of quoting the talk of the grand stand and the high-toned club—is that “ the Opposition have done remarkably good work.” The good work, as all the world knows, consisted of preventing all work, good, bad or indifferent. There is an important addition —or is it an exception?— to this “universal” eulogy in the statement by Captain Russell that “even old political opponents of his own had expressed satisfaction at the result of the session.” It is, of course, conceivable that a Liberal should feel genuine satisfaction at the display of Opposition and Upper House obstructive tactics, because of the powerful argument it supplies against the party system and in favour of the reform of the Legislative Council. Viewed in this light, the action of the Opposition during the late session may prove to be “remarkably good work,” of the unintended kind, in the cause of progress and reform. We shall be greatly mistaken if the all but universal voice of the country is not lifted up in indignant condemnation of the means employed to block all legislative business and ifo defeat projects upon which the hearts of the people were set. We have, in the meantime, to be grateful for the candour which impelled Captain Russell, on the eve of his departure for England, to accept the full responsibility for the obstruction of the past session, to glory in it and to acknowledge it to be his idea of careful consideration and criticism. As an “ old political opponent ” of his, we will not be misunderstood when we express the hope that he and the other “ leaders ” of the Conservative Party may always exhibit the same conception of the duty of an Opposition and the same candour in acknowledging the faith by which they are inspired.