UNREASONABLE REASONING.

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160794, 30 October 1920, Page 4

UNREASONABLE REASONING.

The debate which followed the tabling of the Committee’s report was remarkable for the exhibition of blind prejudice and complete lack of commonsense given by the opponents of State ownership. The Prime Minister once mare played the role of the little hoy who hangs on to his mother’s skirt. Pie thought it better to have Imperial-owned rather than New Zealand-owned ships. Wliy? Because the New Zealand Government couldn’t make a success of it, for the reason that its competitors would be managed by experts. So he prefers to lean on poor old mother. Could not New Zealand engage an expert or two for her shipping? The New Zealand Government Life Insurance Department, if not the largest, is one of the best managed and most successful of insurance concerns, and that in the face of the strongest competition. Cannot Mr Massey see that

a similar policy of management in respect to shipping might not improbably ledd to similar results? Mr Lysnar, another apostle for pirate—beg pardon, private—'-enterprise, did not believe in State ownership because quick decision and close attention to detail was required in the management. Well, the New Zealand railways are not the most perfect concern in the world, nor the biggest. At the same time, compared even with many private lines, they are not badly managed. They have never, for instance, had a whole railway station collapse in a moment from decay and tumble down, on the train beneath, as happened to a London railway company a few years ago. And their heads and subordinate officers have very frequently to make quick decisions, and they have an immensity of detail to attend to, and they do both fairly well. _ Put a State steamer line under similar management, and there is no reason for supposing that It will not do fairly well too. Incidentally, it may be remarked that had the Government put the State Coal Mine Department under similar efficient managership to that of the Railways and Government Insurance, Instead of, as many people believe, deliberately discrediting it by a wrong management policy, it would be a greater success than it is. There Is little use, however, arguing the point with prejudiced people. The main thing to consider is that if Parliament adopts the Committee’s report, then a real stop will be gained. The suggested privatelyowned and Government-subsidised line will ultimately prove no relief at all, but it will open a few eyes, and pave the way for the final adoption of the only effective remedy. Also it indicates—and this is no inconsiderable matter—that the fcarstruck_ souls who formerly spoke of the majestic shipping ring with bated breath, have at last screwed up sufficient courage to p. k ■ out their longues at it.