The Wanganui Chronicle. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1945. THE MINES VOTE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 89, Issue 277, 23 November 1945, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1945. THE MINES VOTE

’T'HB efforts of the Opposition to discover what was the true position in respect to the profit or loss resulting from the operation of the State Mines seemed to have borne fruit—in the end. But why should the Minister require to have the facts extracted from him as though he were unwillingly submitting himself to the ministrations of a tooth-extractor?

The public business is public: even though the facts are not pleasant reading there is no good purpose served in hiding them. That an endeavour is made to cover up facts which should be published or are given reluctantly by the Minister is sufficient conduct to breed suspicion. Why should the public be denied access to its own business records? It is claimed by those who advocate the nationalisation of industry that it places business in public control. Experience proves that it does nothing of the kind: when business is privately operated there is often more public control than when it is nationalised. The reason for this is simple enough: should a member of the public complain, for instance, about short weight, he can complain to the appropriate inspector who will carry out an inspection of the weighing apparatus used in deciding the quantities in dispute. The inspector has no interest to serve either on one side or on the other: his strength lies in his impartial position. \\ ben that same inspector is required to take acton against a Government Department, however, a new set of conditions arises. He is confronted not by a member of the public whom he can bring before a magistrate if need be: he is confronted by all the resources of the Crown arrayed against him. He would be less—or more—than human if he failed to count the cost of measuring himself against such a combination of forces, which might meet in the person of the same Minister who controls the department of State that employs the inspector. Even under the best of circumstances the Minister in charge of the Department finds himself in the role of chief advocate for the Department under his control. He docs ijpt perhaps intentionally side with the Department officers against the public, but the Minister is in a singular situation. He is dependent upon his departmental officers lor their service, for without their loyal support the Minister is but one man against the world and he can accomplish nothing. Loyalties beget loyalties, and any Minister worthy of his place finds himself prompted by a sense of loyalty to the men who aid him. He is, consequently, predisposed in their favour. They are specialists in putting their own case; they have all the resources of the Department at their disposal, and they must be expected to use them. Further, the Minister is always inclined to view a complaint with some degree of suspicion that it is promoted not by a genuine grievance but by those who would be happier if he were separated from his portfolio. Political ambitions are not always confined to the members of the Opposition. 1 le greatest enemies some Ministers have are those of their own household, and well they know it. A Minister as a rule has been taught by a hard experience to be on his guard. He is. The public has to overcome that barrier of suspicion before it can get his ear Most matters do not merit a pilgrimage to Wellington and, consemZ y ’ mi® 7 ? re ° rnC Wilh wllatcvcr grace the sufferer can ® lhls bell) g so, where a Munster either can or should be resnccl’ t fhf 0 WayS | VC adVISCd t 0 Pursue tllat course in Ministeri’d tnti"T. UeSS departments that P‘ a -d under his