THE New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) WEDNESDAY, JUNE 1, 1898. THE PROGRAMME.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 3448, 1 June 1898, Page 2

THE New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.)

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 1, 1898. THE PROGRAMME.

r fith which are incorporated the Wellington Independent , established 1845 , and the New Zealander .

Ik his speech at Feilding the night before last the Premier fully outlined the policy of the Government so far as it relates to the approaching session. Parliament, it is announced, will meet on the 21th of June, and the Government will then put local government reform at the head of the business paper for the session which promises to be so eventful, perhaps so rich in important consequences. Speaking generally, Mr Seddoa declares his intention to relieve Parliament of the reputation it has long—and rightly—had as merely an enlarged board of works. The aspiration is a highly commendable one, aud the effort to carry it out will ha observed with interest in view of the fact that most other Premiers have tried, or professed to try, the sam> thing, anl have invariably and conspicuously failed. The fact is that Parliaments are, in these new self-governing countries, almost necessarily boards of work), whore, as a corollary of tha f , the “ good membor for the district” flmds’oes. Tus is so in colonies larger and more centralised than New Zealand—in New South "Wales, whoro, in spite of the appiront withdrawal of the Public Works Department from political influence, ministerial doormats are still worn thin by Parliammtary representatives who too frequently succeed in getting what they cam > to beg for ; and in Victoria, where unprofitable railways have bean built to the back doors of people with political influence. InQreaasland and Tasmania, too, wa have lately seen how concessions of another kind, but prompted by the same deference to political pressure, may be given at the expense of the whole community. History a il experience therefore go to show that the Ministry which endeavours to lift Parliament above district considerations—to make it, in Mr Seddon’s words, “a body dealing with larger questions affecting the well-being of the whole people”—will tender for a long and arduous contract. But it does not follow from this presumption that our methods of local government cannot bo reformed with gen oral benefit. The Premier’s proposals in this respect are all in the direction of making local self-govern-ment more representative and effective, and that, whatever may be the ultimate result in relation to the general Government, is a commendable reform, because it is in keeping with the democratic tendency of the times. It is proposed to extend representation on local bodies beyond owners and lessees to rent-payers, male or female ; which is a logical reform, for as the Premier said the tenant really pays rates; the landlord adds them to rents. On questions relating to loans to local bodies, a hare majority of accredited householders, property-owners and lessees is to decide the issue, which will mean obviating the cumbrous conditions which at present so frequently prevent enforcement of the real wish of the community. We have in this city, for example, often seen a generally desired civic reform barred because certain superfluous conditions were not complied with at the poll. The same argument applies to rating on unimproved values, which is to ba enforced it the majority at the poll declare for it, irrespective of values or numbers on the roll.

It is also props'ed to establish State fire and accident insurance system!, and, among other thing*, to advance capital to settlers who wish to found creameries and to resume land available for use as small farms and for dairy factories. The two last-mentioned proposals are, of course, only extensions of existing powers. That might also be said of the insurance suggestions, and in support of such a suggestion reference could admittedly be made to the success of the Government’s life insurance work. If this success can be repeated in fire and accident operations, in fair competition, there is no reason why the venture should not be made. -The only reliable test of its advisableness is it: chance of success. It is essential, however, that the competition shall be fair, that the State operations shall be' conducted on business principles. Mr Seddon talks of the State bringing down the rate of fire premiums as it brought down the rate of interest. It would seem that competition had already brought this rate down as low as is compatible with safe business for insurers, and, if that is so, it would be improper for the Government to cut rates under a reasonably profitable margin merely for the sake of running a State fire insurance business. On the contrary the reasonable .assumption is that it the Government starts insuring against fire its prestige and wealth of security should enable it to safely ask for premiums at least as high as those of the companies. So with respect to accident insurance. Probably the accident insurance scheme has been suggested by the verdict of the Court on the Brunner disaster and the plain resultant necessity for legislative reform. However, as Mr Seddon says that this accident insurance question has been fully gone into, and that “he knows of nothing bettor the Government could do than take up the question,” it is advisable to await the details of the scheme before expressing a definite opinion on it. In whole the policy outlined is, it will be noticed, essentially one of what may bo called domestic reform. The opinion has often been expressed in these columns, and we repeat it now, that however necessary and just changes like those promised may be, the requirement of the country is also for a platform with larger planks for completion of the Midland, North Island . Trunk and Otago Central railways, for instance. For advocating these and other works as essential parts of a successful Ministry’s policy this paper has been accused of callously trying to help the Cabinet on at the public expense, to supply the party in office with a policy that would be palatable to the electors, regardless of other considerations that ought to be taken into account by the constituencies in deciding between two political sections. Thera was never any such intention or'design in advocating a more vigorous policy. An undeniable necessity for certain works to be undertaken exists. If the present Ministry does not recognise that necessity its potential successors will, with the probable result that Liberal rule wifi be abolished, unless the Opposition, following the tactics of the Conservatives m Great Britain, adopts a liberal programme.