THEN AND NOW

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 8182, 25 July 1912, Page 2

THEN AND NOW

KNOCK-ENDED EEEOEMBBS. A GLANCE INTO HANSAED. Mr Massey is realising -very early in his ministerial career that it is easier to criticise than it it to construct. Exactly two years ago, when he was leader of the Opposition and knew nothing of the responsibilities of office, he rated the Prime Minister soundly lor not giving the Mouse of Eepreecntativo a lead on the gambling question. Sir Joseph had submitted proposals on the question to the Mouse and had announced that he wished members to discuss them entirely free from party tics. The present Prime Minister and his Minister of Justice, Mr Herdman, cook strong exception to this course and twitted the Liberal leader with having no mind of his own and no courage. • Mr Massey: i desire now to say one word about the method of procedure in connection with these resolutions introduced this afternoon. Why have the Government not followed the usual course by down their proposals .u the shape of a Bill? Sir Josepn Ward: 1 want to get the decision of the House. Mr Massey: Exactly. The honourable gentleman is, as usual, out on a fishing expedition. Ho wants to get the decision of the Mouse, and then he will prepare and frame his Bill on that decision. It is the old story. The Eight non- the Prime Minister and his colleagues have no opinion of their own. Sir Joseph Ward: You stated you were going to vote against the totalisator. . - Mr Massey: I am going to do exactly what I think proper, and I do not intend to be influenced by the right uonourablo gentleman. However, tne Mill will-come down in the usual course, and he will base his Bill upon the result of the vote on his resolutions; and he will not be guided by his own opinions or the opinions of his colleagues. Mr Herdman was even more emphatic than his chief in contending that the Prime Minister should have given the House a lead 'on the questions: Mr Herdman: Now, the Government, in bringing down these resolutions and submitting this question to a referendum of the House, are themselves using “the sheet-anchor of the. shuffler.' That is the position. , ~ , . Sir Joseph Ward: Very far-fetched. Mr Herdman: it is not far-fetched at all. The Government, if they had the courage, should have brought down a Bill in the ordinary, constitutional way, and asked us to vote for a clause or against a clause, for the Bui or against it. . . . The Government are placed upon those benches to give the House a lead; the Government are supposed to be the body in this assembly which is supposed to furnish the ideas to be submitted to this House for consideration; the Government aw supposed to fiimish a policy and to furnish the brains of the House; but instead of furnishing a policy and . giving .us a lead, and instead of standing np in this House representing the brains of the Assembly, they come down to the Legislature and say, ,r We are not able ourselves to determine what course we shall pursue in this particular case; we are afraid to do it; we ask you to decide first —furnish us with ideas, furnish ue with principles, and then wo will incorporate them in a statute and submit it to the House." Those were the brave views of Mr Massey and Mr Herdman two years ago, bravely expressed on July 21, IMO. How they have changed since then I