Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. An organ of student opinion at Victoria University, Wellington. Vol. 23, No. 9. Wednesday, November 9, 1960

A Test Of Character

A Test Of Character

Democratic government is, then, a test of character and this test applies to those who seek the votes the system is to work well, the dominant objective must be the general good of the people as a whole. There's no preaching about this and if it is brushed aside lightly as a well worn platitude, those who take that line cannot fairly claim to be true to their trust. It is just plain hard fact and there's lots of experience to support it.

This test of character is a two-way affair. It applies, in the first place, to those who prepare the policies or programmes that are to be put before the electors. Promises of a kind will always appear in such policies. After all, what is policy, but a series of promises? But these promises differ in their nature: some make their greatest appeal to good sense: others aim straight at the pocket and even the greed of cupidity of the voter. Let me cite three different types:

  • * First, a promise that New Zealand will join the World Bank.
  • * Secondly, the offer of a £16 million railway for Nelson.
  • * Thirdly, a promise to give taxpayers a £100 income tax rebate.

No one could successfully argue that all three promises are of the same nature or quality or that they appeal to voters in the same way. In deciding whether we should or should not join the World Bank, we try to decide which course would be for the greater good of New Zealand. When we look at the second promise, different considerations will apply. Is such a railway justifiable on grounds of necessity? Will it operate for the good of Nelson in an economic sense and can it be said that New Zealand as a whole should contribute towards its cost ? Or was it no more than a last minute and scarcely considered bid to win a seat for a political party? And, lastly, there's the promise of the tax rebate of £100. Where lies the appeal in this instance? Is such a promise aimed at securing the good of the community, or does it come right down to the individual and pecuniary gain of the voter? No one would call that the 65-dollar question.

So much for the party that makes the promises. But what of the voter? Well there's a test for him, too. If he can succeed in putting the general good ahead of his personal interest, good government will be as near to a certainty as institution.