CABINET RE SHUFFLE

New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12455, 25 May 1926, Page 7

CABINET RE SHUFFLE

AUCKLAND DISSATISFIED PRIME MINISTER’S METHODS "JOINERY, NOT CABINETMAKING" (By Telegraph.—Special to “Times.**) AUCKLAND, May 24. The latest Cabinet reshuffle is received coldly by the “Herald.” It devotes a sub-editorial to the subjectwhich it obviously does not approach with enthusiasm. The “Herald” concludes: “The rest of the adjustments inside the ranks are of smaller interest than the fact that the process of general reconstruction proceeds so slowly. This instalment really carries it very little further forward. There is only the promise that Mr Coates, himself, will be relieved in part of the heavy load he is carrying in addition to that of party leadership. It was understood that he would make use of the free hand given him, when first chosen, to close up the ranks of his own immediate staff, and adding to its membership in accordance with his judgment of the men and their capabilities. What has been done in that direction has been done slowly, to all appearance tentatively. It has been a case of temporising and leaving something more for the future, just as this latest instance does with the further appointment held over to a later date. The piecemeal process may keep the busi-

ness of the oountry moving, but there is certainly ground for asking whether more definite and resolute handling of the task of selection wonld not result in more efficiency and expedition in the conduct of publio affairs. ABSOLUTELY A FREE HAND To-night’s “Star” in an editorial entitled “Patchwork,” does not spare Mr Coates. It says: “If there was one quality which New Zealand was prepared to concede to its present L’rimo Minister, when he held, iess important post, it was decision of character. It was generally believed that the Minister for Public Works knew how to make up his mind, and having made it up, was prepared to adhere to his course in spite of criticism or of any urging that he should deviate from it. Sir Coates’s conduct of affairs since he took over the premiership, leads to doubt as to whether that summary of his character was a just one or in the nltcinat’ve whether it has since undergone deterioration. Especially do these doubts arise over his reconstruction of the Cabinet. No Prime Minister ever had a wider mandate. He was returned at the general election with s majority which staggered even himself. He had an absolutely free hand Tn the choosing of his colleagues. The resignation of every Minister was put ia his pocket to use or to tear up as he saw fit. Nobody suggested that his team was the best available, and it was generally thought that at least three of them would retire to give place to stronger men. Week after week has passed, however, and still these members retain their posts, and still there is an uncertainty as to Mr Coates’s final intentions. The present announcement is part of the piecemeal methods by which Mr Coates has proceeded. Instead of boldly stating the personnel of his Cabinet, at one fell swoop as he might bavo done, he has chopped and changed about, taking in four new men at irregular intervals and pleasing nobodv but tho appointees m tho process. 'This is not Cabinet-making, it is joinery, and of the apprentice type at that.”