The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 1910. POLITICS.

Southland Times, Issue 14370, 17 March 1910, Page 4

The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 1910. POLITICS.

It is interesting to learn from the member for the town that the Land Bill of last session is not likely to be brought before the House again, and that it is very doubtful whether any other Land Bill will be submitted to the attention of Parliament during the coming session. Mr Hanan gave this forecast to one of our representatives on Tuesday night as his own opinion, and without professing to have any special knowledge of what is being arranged in the Ministerial rooms at the present time. But, having regard to the tact that he has just returned from a conference of leaseholders held at Christchurch, at which about a quarter of the members of the House were present or accounted for, it may fairly be assumed that Mr Hanan is not speaking idly, but' that he has good reason to believe that the Government will endeavour to get through the session of 1910 without introducing a Land Bill. It is very natural that Sir Joseph Ward should endeavour to avoid a measure that is not only excessively contentious, but also exceedingly risky at the present time. There is a Freehold majority in the House, including a large number of the Government’s supporters. There ,is a minority of Leaseholders which is unquestionably strong in debating power, and capable in that respect of making things extremely warm for any Government. This Leasehold minority sits on the Government side of the House, and the safety of the Ministry depends upon its loyalty. The Government cannot introduce a Land Bill which does not make concessions to the Freeholders without the risk of consolidating the Freehold strength of the House; it cannot introduce a Land Bill which does make concessions to Freeholders without arousing the opposition of the Leaseholders in its own party. Obviously, therefore, the Government would much rather not introduce a Land Bill at all, and if what Mr Hanan says is correct an attempt will be made to get through the forthcoming session without any legislation of this kind. It is doubtful, however, whether the Government will secure peace by this means. The Freehold majority in the House is so strong that a demand for laud legislation from it won Id be difficult to resist, and the Freeholders on the Opposition side, at least, are likely to make the demand very forcibly. Possibly both the Freeholders and the Leaseholders in the Government party may he induced to consent to a further postponement of the Land Bill, but in that case the Government's position

in the country is not likely to be improved. Mr Hanan thinks that the greater part of the session will be taken up with the consideration of the Local Government Bill, but he is doubtful whether the time devoted to it will ensure its passage. There is no doubt that the Bill is badly needed, and that the country would benefit if Parliament were relieved of the functions of a large board of public works and enabled to devote its time exclusively to the consideration of the political and social problems which are the proper study of a- national legislative assembly. But there are probably many members of the House who are not willing to forego the patronage which they enjoy through controlling the expenditure of votes, and Mr Hanan Is afraid that opposition to the radical improvements proposed in the Local Government Bill will prevent it passing into law. The only other measure mentioned by Mr Hanan as likely to come before Parliament this year was a Licensing Bill, but in view of the collapse of the compromise that was supposed last year to have,been arranged between the Licensing party and the Trade, it is difficult to see what proposals can be introduced this year with any prospect of success.