PERPLEXED POLITICIANS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8481, 16 July 1913, Page 6

PERPLEXED POLITICIANS

Those politicians who indulge in the fancy of styling themselves “Reformers,” and make such a poor attempt to live up to the name, are certainly getting a little more than they relish in the way of criticism jnst now. Not tor many years have there been such telling speeches from the Opposition aide of the House of Representatives os in the present Address-in-Reply deflate, and it is quite amusing to objrvo the floundering of those who are called upon to make reply. When Mr Russell last week, on the production of the quarter’s finances by the Hon. James Allen, showed that the increase in expenditure was above all records, and contrasted the circumstance with the “Reform” party’s solemn undertaking to reduce the expenditure, the Hon. W. H. Herriea sought escape by justifying the higher rate of expenditure. The Government, he argued, believed in paying high wages—that was the explanation. The Rainbow Minister, in his defence of the Government in connection with the same matter, declared that the increase arose out of the Government’s generosity in giving pensions and in subsidising public service superannuation funds. Mr J. B. Hino, however ■ —Mr Hone, of Tammany reputation, the man who endeavoured to destroy Liberalism by slandering the Liberals —offered an altogether different theory to the House yesterday. There had Been increases in the public expenditure, he admitted, but ho argued that the responsibility did not lie upon the (■-Reformers.” The trouble was that they had inherited the Estimates of the Mackenzie Ministry! The “Reformers” were “pushed for time,” and had simply to adopt what they found ready to their hands. We shall be interested to see what further theories are advanced to account for a state of affairs exactly opposite to that which the Conservatives undertook to bring about. Clearly, if Mr Hine is right, Mr Herries and Mr Fisher are wrong; and if the slightest reliance is ‘<j be placed upon the Ministerial excuses, then Mi- Hine is barking up the wrong tree. But Mr Hine added, in effect, that this year we shall all see vnhat wo shall see. This year “Reform” will have got into its stride, and there would, he implied, be real reductions in expenditure. To that Mr A. M. Myers made the retort that the Government has made a very bad start, which is quite true. Anyhow, “Reform” promises, come they from the Fishers or the Hines of this life, are no longer received by observant people with anything but derision. The time bas come when the Tories have to bo judged on their actions, and not on their pledges.