The Taranaki Herald. DAILY EVENING FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1918. BETTER GOVERNMENTS.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 16301, 29 November 1918, Page 2

The Taranaki Herald. DAILY EVENING FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1918. BETTER GOVERNMENTS.

In the latest number of The Round Table there is a thoughtful article on “The Better Government of the United Kingdom,” which is in some respects applicable to New Zealand. Here we have our government very largely centralised in Wellington, and there is a tendency to centralise it still further. The writer of the article in question urges decentralisation in the United Kingdom, and though the conditions here and there are very different, some of the arguments apply equally in both cases. In the.

United Kingdom 45,000,000 people are served by a single executive and legislature, which have also to control the external affairs of a quarter of mankind. Here we have a million people concerned only with their own government, to which its executive and legislature ordinarily can devote their whole attention. The United States has a government to every two millions of its people, and, to come nearer home, Australia has six State Governments and a Federal Government. New Zealand up to 40 odd years ago had several provincial and one General Government, hut abandoned that system in favour of one central government, which has gradually shorn local 'authorities of their powers, and not always with advantage. The Round Table writer points out that the British Parliament is unable to deal with the needs of the British Isles because those needs are too many and various . No one assembly could possibly consider and decide all the questions calling for decision in so vast and complicated a society. The growing difficulty of passing the measures needed for efficient government is largely responsible for the tendency of British politics to decline from the plane of statesmanship to that of the demagogue. In recent years proposals have been less and less considered on their merits and more and more from the standpoint of mere sentiment. And the reason is obvious. Parliamentary time is so precious that Ministers will not look at a measure likely to provoke the opposition of a vested interest unless there is a wave of sentiment behind it. But measures most vital to the public interest such as the reform of local taxation, do not from their nature evoke storms of enthusiasm. Therefore they are neglected. This is just as true of New Zealand. For many years Minister after Minister has promised to bring before Parliament the question of local- government reform, but it is extremely difficult for the House to find the time —or give the time, which in the ultimate result amounts to the same- thing—to deal with it. And if it did devote a special session to the question it would be found that conditions differ so much in different parts of the Dominions that no satisfactory result would accrue. In educational matters it is increasingly difficult to secure attention and justice for local requirements, simply because of the centralisation that has taken place. So also with hospital and charitable aid administration, and with public works, such as roads and railways. So great is the dissatisfaction abroad in connection with these and similar matters that a proposal to decentralise government and revert to something like the old provincial system would probably meet with much support if it were well put before the public. Such matters’ as external affairs, defence, navigation, and fiscal policy must of course always be dealt with by a central authority. But local government and at least primary education might be much better looked after by a provincial authority. Our present system fails to secure the services of the best administrators to carry on the government of the country. Taranaki, we are sure, could provide a small assembly of its own infinitely more capable of devising a scheme of local government suited to its peculiar needs than any Parliament ever assembled in Wellington. Its enterprise is blocked in many directions because the General Government and Parliament will not, or cannot, appreciate the needs and provide the power and means to meet them. A provincial assembly woulcPattract the. best administrative and governing talent in the district. A general assembly does not, chiefly because the best men will not waste their time at Wellington. It is not that they are not sufficiently patriotic, that the pay is not good enough, or that their own affairs demand all their attention,., ,f or find many .of our

ablest men giving freely of their time and ability without remuneration of any kind. But men of this stamp want to see that their efforts are not thrown away. They will not waste their time in fruitless party discussions. They want to act, not talk, and while they will and do give much of their time to local government they are continually hampered in their efforts by the restrictions placed upon them by the central governing authority. The whole question of local government wants reforming in the direction of giving localities or districts greater power.