The Daily News MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1930. ALL FOR THE STATE.

Taranaki Daily News, 16 June 1930, Page 8

The Daily News MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1930. ALL FOR THE STATE.

In the speeches that he has been making in his eleetoi’ate during the past week Mr. C. A. Wilkinson, M.P., has very aptly illustrated the freedom of his political thought and the sturdiness of his convictions hi’ his references to the evils of the party system in politics. The member for Egmont has not, of course, made a new discovery in relation to the party system. A great many people probably realise its defects as keenly as he does, but because they are at a loss to know how it could be mended they have little to say about it. Among the evils done by the party system is the dissipation of the energies of party members in useless effort—the effort involved in the perpetual struggle between parties. A worse evil perhaps is the prohibition of individual effort and the restriction of initiative, by reason of which it seems that good men are apt to be kept out of Parliament. It cannot be gainsaid that party influence sometimes helps men of very mediocre attainment to gain election, and it is probable that men possessing far higher qualifications would offer their services if it were not that they resent the indignity of party domination. Is it, then, possible to evolve a system which wojild give us better representation in Parliament by men who .would deVote their talents entirely to their legislative and administrative duties? Mr. Wilkinson -does not hesitate to say that it is possible. He at any rate can conceive of a Parliament in which there would be none for the party and all for the State, and the means by which this millennial condition would be brought is the election by the House of the Prime Minister, who would choose his own Ministers. This is not the elective executive —a familial* dream of ultra-pro-gressive politicians—but merely the elective leader. In practice the two methods would work out alike, for in each case the Ministers would be responsible to the House and the Prime Minister would stand or fall with his colleagues. Mr. Wilkinson’s proposal is interesting, and it is' not impossible to imagine conditions under which it could be brought; about. But between imagination and realisation there is a very wide gulf. In order to allow Parliament to function in the manner proposed by Mr. Wilkinson parties would have to be abolished in the country.' Elections would no longer be fought on party platforms, but on individual platforms. If there were 300 candidates at a general ..election for the 80 seats in the House the 80 elected members, chosen presumably because they possessed outstanding qualities, would perhaps have 80 different policies to propound. The House would meet to elect its leader, and if the members were all as free and independent as Mr. Wilkinson would have them the result of the first ballot taken might be that each of the 80 prospective leaders would receive one vote. It would seem that in order to keep the proceedings absolutely free of party influence there could be no nominations for the leadership, for if, let us say, some member rose and nominated Mr. Wilkinson the inevitable result would be the formation of what would be' in effect a party to support Mr. Wilkinson. And if Mr. Wilkinson were elected, against two or three other nominees, how would he j choose his Cabinet? Would he select men who had said they did not wish him to.be the leader, or would he, quite naturally and reasonably, take the view that those who were in sympathy with him would do better work for the country, under his leadership, than his opponents would? And suppose that in the House of 80 members Mr. Wilkinson received 36 votes and two opponents received 24 and 20. Preferential voting, or_even a second ballot, might give Mr. Wilkinson a majority of the votes, but that would be because certain people who really preferred another candidate would have to realise that they could not obtain their desire and therefore would have to accept a compromise. Parties, of course, are built on compromises, and we are afraid that even if Mr. Wilkinson’s scheme were given a fair start from scratch, as the sportsman would say, it would not be long before members holding somewhat similar views would make compromises and get together in what would virtually j be a party. And the electors similarly would hive off into parties, for they naturally must have ! a cause of some kind around whose standard they can rally. It I has been said that the idea of a State where all the ablest men in the land join, without regard to political opinion, to devote the best of . their, talents, to the public service is enchanting, but it has

never been permanently realised anywhere. Perhaps the best that we can hope is that Mr. Wilkinson’s stout appeal may induce the politicians to give more of their service to the business of the country and less to the affairs of the party.