THE New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY). FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1891.

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 9318, 12 June 1891, Page 2

THE New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY).

FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1891.

With which are incorporated the. Wellington Independent, established 1H45, and the New Zealander,

The Governor's speech is, as usual, long, and sparing of opportunities for debate. There is absolutely nothing in it that can be debated. Hr Bryce said that it contained many important matters ; and he was quite right; hut there is nothing, nevertheless, for debate. Before a policy can be debated there must be both principles and details before the House. From end to end of the Speech only one principle is laid down, and that is a principle to which no Opposition would dream of objecting. Of course we refer to the principle of the genuine occupation and improvement of the , public lands. The public attention has been for months rivelted on the possibilities of the taxation proposals of the Government. The speech tells us that in the future—dim or otherwise—which at present belongs to the Financial Statement, lies hidden a scheme for changing the incidence of the chief part of the direct taxation. But it does not say in what direction the change is to be. We are left to the genius of conjecture, romping freely among land taxes, income taxes, exemptions great and small, and destined to be weary and sick of the subject before the Treasurer rises and addresses Mr — by the way, there is at present no Mr anybody for him to address. It is out of the question for anybody to debate this part of the Speech. The “ reform” is to be “bold,” and at the same time it is to be “gradual ;’’ it is to effect a radical change, and it is at the same time to avoid disturbance both to the revenue and to the public sense of security. Of course, if it will .dp #}l this

the new departure in taxation will commend itself to all men. We should have preferred to learn that the provision for the public service made last year having proved more than sufficient, less would be asked for in the present session. But the reduction of taxation is, for the present, at least, a lost art among our politicians. But whatever may be said on that subject, one thing is certain, the financial proposals of the Government, can by no possibility be yet said to have reached the debateable stage. The Native Land Bills and the whole of the policy Bills stand exactly in the same category. Nevertheless the announcements are, as Mr Bryce said, very important. The Government will make a large change of some kind in the incidence of taxation, they will mend the Native land law and the ordinary land law, and they will attack the great problem presented by the rotations between labour and capital, and they arc alive to the necessity for curing the exodus—tho disease they last year so bitterly and brilliantly made the foundation of attacks on their predecessors, then in office. These are very important subjects. It is quite in accordance with Constitutional practice to say as little about such things in the speeches from the Throne. Mr Gladstone, when in Opposition in 1885, frankly said so much when speaking of tho Queen’s Speech. On that occasion he laid down the doctrine that all Governments are supposed to use the Speech, not for the purpose of concealing their thoughts, but of saying as little about them as possible.

As the Government has carried out this principle with great ability and completeness they ought to bo prepared for the logical consequence. Why have anything more in the Reply than a merely formal expression of satisfaction that the Government is going to try to do something good ? A speech that opens no door to debate ought to bo followed by a reply of precisely the same character. Both sides of the House, would be very glad to join in saying that they are glad tho Government “ means business.” But the old arrangement of pretending to be preparing for a grand debate was kept up elaborately yesterday by both sides. Mr Bryce opened the ball probably with tho object of posing as tho leader of the Opposition, although he could not succeed in showing why a thing which is undebateablo should require to be debated by anybody. And the Premier replied, probably because a Premier, when the leader of the other side crosses swords with him, must shake his blade and go through a certain routine of lunge and parry. The House of Commons set a very good example in this matter the other day, by omitting all debate, and adopting a merely formal resolution of reply. Let us got useless debating out of the way and prepare the way for the real business, of which there will be plenty and to spare. That is the real significance of the Speech. >