THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1901.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11771, 28 September 1901, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1901.

. «J» Those who have not recently made a stay in Wellington have no idea of the centralisation which is going on there to the injury of the rest of the colony. We, indeed, in Auckland realise how in almost every respect local government and local administration is becoming weakened, or is departing from us, but only those who have good opportunities in Wellington can see how power and influence and the governing machinery are becoming centralised there to the detriment of political liberty. In old times, when Southem politicians were moving to deprive Auckland of the seat of Government, they were fond of saying that it was a wen on the neck of the colony, sucking healthy blood to a morbid structure. But if there was a wen thenthat was in the early sixties—it was a very small one, because the Governmental machine was a mere trifle compared to what it is now. That machine indeed has grown with the growth of the colony- It has grown much faster than the colony. It has increased indeed as rapidly as the colonial indebtedness. At the time when Auckland was attacked as having too much influence on account of being the seat of Government, the provincial administrations were in existence, having very large powers, which are now all centralised in Wellington. Our City Council can scarcely hold a meeting and come to any decision without having an eye to Wellington, and so it is with almost every local body throughout the colony.

Two incidents have lately occurred j at Wellington which show that the hurtful centralisation at Wellington is forcing itself upon the notice of those who have to be there during the session, and who have exceptional opportunities of being informed. Mr. Napier has given notice to ask the Government" if, owing to the fact of the City of Wellington being' the seat of Government, and of the disproportionate influence it thereby exercises in the political affairs of the colony, consideration will be given to the advisability of disfranchising those residing in that city, as is the case with reference to the residents of the capita] city of the United States of America." This points in a somewhat different direction from that we have indicated. Mr. Napier thinks that owing to Wellington being the seat of Government, and the people of Wellington being electors, with a compact body of representatives always on the spot, with up-to-date infor- ; mation and knowledge, they have a special influence on legislation, which is hurtful to the rest of the colony. That is no doubt true, but our chief objection is that, especi ally during the last ten years, there has been a continual effort on the. part of Ministers to centralise all administration there, and to reduce the influence of local bodies. The men who drew up the Constitution of the United States were wise and far-seeing, and they considered that for the good of the country at large it was expedient that the people of the capital and of the district around. it should be deprived of political rights.

The second manifestation of the feeling is the fact that Mr. Lawry, on the motion to go into Committee of Supply, on Wednesday, moved that the next Parliament be held in Auckland. Of course, Mr. Lawry did this to oblige Ministers, and in order to prevent supply being obstructed by any amendment which might lead to a long debate." But

that his amendment took' this turn shows the feeling in his mind. And certainly Parliament seems to need a change. What with questions of privilege, debates about payment of members, personal accusations and recriminations, our House of Representatives is falling sadly in the opinion of the country. The whole machine is out of order. It might do good to members and Ministers! and the constituencies, if Parliament sat in some other large centre of casionally. It might lead membes to appreciate the position of placjs to which they are ordinary strangers. We should not object to our members having their minis improved by realising the wants pad necessities of Christchurch and J'unedin, while we are sure that Southera members would be less in cine d to prejudice against Auckland ifthey spent a session here, in the largest city of the colony. They pould then, at all events, be enthusiasts for pushing on the Main Trunk railway, opening up the lands, and putting an end to the isolation of Auckland. In 1862, before the removal of the seat of Government, Parliament sat one session in Wellington. Only a few years ago a motion as carried that a session should be held in Christchurch, but Ministers took it upon themselves to ignore that. It has often been said that if the telegraph had been in operation in 1864, the seat of Government in New Zealand would never have been changed. Now that "we have it everywhere a session of Parliament could easily be held in Auckland, Christchurch, or Dunedin. The proposals of Mr. Napier and Mr. Lawry may be sneered at as being " outside of the domain of practical politics." But underlying them is a feeling which ought to be considered, and which all members of Parliament ought to look to. Centralisation of the administration should be opposed wherever it manifests itself, and there is scarcely a Bill brought into the House in which there are not clauses tending in this direction. It ought to be the aim of every patriotic New Zealander to restrain this tendency, and to build up and strengthen local administration. That always means true 'liberty. On the other hand, centralisation always means an approach to despotism. And we may add to all this, that each citizen should take it as incumbent upon him to elevate and increase the power of the local institutions of the district he resides in.