The New Zealand Times. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1913. WEIGHED IN THE BALANCE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8588, 26 November 1913, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1913. WEIGHED IN THE BALANCE

It is impossible to avoid tlio conviction, now that the end of another year is approaching, that the people of New Zealand made a great mistake when they allowed the Tory party to seize the power of administration. Compared with two years ago, it cannot be argued that the change has brought about any improvement in the condition of our affairs. If the cast of government was excessive then, it is extravagantly excessive to-day, because it has increased out of all proportion to the growth of population. Where wo had active progress two years ago, there is now colonising stagnation. Where there was comparative peace in the industrial world, there are now strife and bitterness, with an ominous outlook that is disquieting and discouraging. The only individual who has benefited by the change of administration is the squatter. He has been made secure in the possession of his great estates, which stand in the way of closer settlement, and which are an obstacle to the progress and development of, the country. He is protected from further increase in taxation, though it is acknowledged that ho is not bearing his fair share, while the load continues to press unequally bn the shoulders of the man of moderate means and the worker. It cannot be said that the business man is so well off ns he was two years ago. Tlie purchasing power of the people ia being restricted, the financial credit of the small trader is being limited, and penalising restrictions are being imposed upon commerce in the interests of the land monopolists. The small farmer is not nearly so well off as he was. If he requires money for the expansion of his operations, it is no longer available to him from the State at per cent., and ho is fortunate if ho can obtain the accommodation ho requires from the financial companies and stock agencies at from eight to ten per cent. If he is anxious to provide for the future of his sons, and see them settled on farms of their own, where is ho to look for the opportunity? Does the vaunted freehold, which has accomplished nothing beyond converting Crown tenants into wealthy men at the expense of the people, offer any prospect to him ? There is no possibility of escaping the obvious fact that, with tho advent of Toryism, land settlement is practically stopped. It matters nothing to which department of administration wo turn. Each and every on© presents tho same unsatisfactory object lesson. The people have allowed tho Tories to seize control of the governing machine, on the assurance that they were disinterestedly intent upon “ Reform,” and two years’ experience is furnishing us with adequate evidence that they have reformed nothing, and never really intended to reform anything. What better experience can be furnished than the stagnation that prevails in the department of railway construction. Two years ago, work was in vigorous progress on quite a number of necessary railway lines, and laud was being rapidly opened up for settlement, while tho holdings of deserving pioneers

were being steadily brought nearer to profitable markets. What is the situation to-day? Many of those works have boon temporarily abandoned, or very nearly so, and the operations on others may be fairly likened to the progress of the snail. Is this halting policy in the interests of the country? Between Napier and Gisborne, the line has been abandoned altogether, and many thousands of pounds’ worth of work is being ruined by the weather and the encroachments of cattle. Meanwhile, millions of acres of virgin country continue to remain inaccessible, while would-be settlers are hopelessly clamouring for land? Is this what, in a country with such immense potentialities, can be regarded as Reform ?

It is precisely the same with land settlement. Two years ago, land ballots were of daily occurrence, and settlers were being assisted on to the soil in hundreds and thousands. The State landing departments were active, assisting these email farmers with their building and fencing operations and the breaking in of their holdings, and each year saw a substantial growth in the products for export. Whero is that activity now? Wo are depending upon the fruits of past Liberal enterprise for the increase of our production, because very little additional land is being settled, and ballots are few and far between. And yet we wore told that this was a farmers’ Government. However, this was merely one of many fictio'hs that are now being exploded by the progress of events. It is a squatters’ Government, with no practical sympathy for the small farmers, and tho small farmers themselves have already learnt to discriminate between the empty sentiment of the Tories and the practical sympathy of the Liberals. Two or three years ago, it was the fashion to ridicule the “taihoa” policy of Sir James Carroll, in, connection ■with native affairs, but what is the policy to-day? Whore is tho active policy that was promised with the advent of the Hon. W. H. Herries? If “taihoa” could be alleged against Sir James Carroll, though there wasmore method than neglect in his policy, it can fairly be said of Mr Herries that he has either been asleep or too indolent and indifferent to discharge tho responsibilities that he took on so lightly with office. Mr Herries has been a rank and unmitigated failure as an administrator of native affairs. His department is in a much worse state to-day than when he assumed control, and the reforms so freely promised are even less likely to materialise than the industrial peace that was to accompany the Massey “square deal.” 1 It would be superfluous to ask what has become of that industrial peace. If the Government was concerned for the welfare of tho country, it would have intervened ■weeks ago between the employers and strikers, and compelled a satisfactory settlement of tho deadlock that is paralysing trade and creating a degree of class bitterness that will never be allayed. This, however, is not the Government policy. It does not want a settlement. There is political advantage to be gained by prolonging the struggle. This political advantage is what the Government is intent upon. While tho conflict continues, public opinion must continue to harden against tho men on strike, and the Government is enabled to acquire a cheap and unmerited reputation for firmness and resolution. But what is the unnecessary i continuance of this struggle costing the business community alone in the diminished trade consequent upon the loss of earnings? The sacrifice in this particular direction is almost incalculable, and yet if a firm Government were in power it might be ended within a couple of days, with a more permanent guarantee of industrial peace than we have had hitherto. On tho other hand, what is to bo gained by pursuing the struggle to the limits of extremity ? If the strikers registered under the Arbitration Act to-morrow, there would be no guarantee against strikes. On tho other hand, the workers would carry into their employment a depth of malignance and hatred that would surely and eventually smoulder into a further fierce conflagration. It is possible to change the name of a Labour organisation. Does it follow that such an operation will change the feelings and convictions of the men who compose that organisation? Sufficient has .already been seen of the operations of tho Civil Service Board to convince tho people that a colossal mistake has been made m surrendering the control ot the service to a triumvirate of gentlemen who are not in any way responsible either to the Government or to Parliament. The new system has not given satisfaction to the service. On the contrary, it has created a seething cauldron of discontent, and not without substantial reason. Wo were assured that there would he no more favouritism in the service. Is it possible to find one officer, no matter how fortunately he may be circumstanced, who is prepared to say that there is no longer any favouritism? That there are grievances in thousands is absolutely beyond question. It is no longer possible to ventilate these grievances. That there are examples of injustice in scores is one of the outstanding features of the existing situation. And yet, in a free and democratic country, the people who pay for tho maintenance of the service have no voice whatever in its control. As for tho civil servants themselves, they aro compelled to suffer in silence, because to offer remonstrance is to incur tbo prospect of reprisal and punishment. Nevertheless, this unhappy and inequitable system is one of the illuminating works of “Reform.” Turn where we will, search whero we may, it is hopeless to look for any administrative improvement as the result of the accession of the Tories to office. In the legislative sense, from tho point of view of administration, or oven in the matter of financial capacity, they have proved themselves to be utter and dismal failures.