Other formats

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

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 77

The Science of Cabinet Construction

The Science of Cabinet Construction.

Let us test the manner in which the Premier has used the power of nomination by the use of which the Ministry is created.

The Ministry should comprise those members of Parliament whose character and ability are most conspicuous, and whose judgment, as brought to bear upon the affairs of the department under their control would best serve the public interests.

By this test how has the nominative power to create the Ministry vested in the Premier been exercised?

When the Liberal party came into power its ministry contained the strongest men in its ranks, and the combination was well balanced and forceful. The Ministry embraced Messrs Ballance, Reeves, McKenzie, Ward, Seddon, Cadman, Carroll and Buckley. This combination was obviously made by Mr Ballance, in the interests of the Liberal party, and because he believed the great state department would be vigorously and efficiently directed by the various Ministers.

Since Cabinet construction has been carried on by the Right Hon. R. J. Seddon, what rule has been observed?

Of the Ballance Cabinet, only Sir J. G. Ward, Jas. Carroll and the Premier remain. Sir J. G. Ward was not originally chosen for Cabinet position by the Premier, but by the late Mr Ballance, and when he rejoined the Cabinet in 1897 it is well known that it was under the direct influence of the late Sir John McKenzie, and not to satisfy any desire of the Right Hon. R. J. Seddon The Premier looked with small satisfaction upon the re-admission to Cabinet rank of a man whose ability was of an order that would justify him in holding his own opinion regarding the work connected with his department, and who might challenge the Premier's caprice or will.

The only other Minister originally in the Cabinet formed by John Ballance, there remains only the Hon. James Carroll. He is Native Minister, and having little or nothing to do he does its fairly well. All the remaining Ministers are the exclusive creation of the Right Hon the Premier. How has he used the power of nomination entrusted to him? Have personal or national interests influenced his use of power?

I unhesitatingly affirm that all the evidence proves that he has deliberately abused the power entrusted to him to "isolate" himself in the Cabinet and magnfy his personal qualities. No man has been honoured with ministerial rank whose strength of character, education or ability were of an order such as would entitle him to challenge the Premier's will or contest with him the dominating position he holds in the Mnistry. Lacking force of character or dignity, the Ministers who are exclusively the choice of the Prenier are treated contemptuously by most members.

The Hon. C. H. Mills has been aptly described by one member as an "amiable inefficient." Another members declared with earnestness that "members all like him, but all laugh at him." Naturally of an easy-going and kindly disposition, the position he occupies as a Minister emphasises his natural defects, and subjects him to many irritating indignities. No page 9 doubt he has served the purpose his political creator designed, by emphasising the importance of his chief, but his elevation into his present trying and unhappy position is a reflection upon the quality of Parliament, and an irrefutable condemnation of the use the Premier has made of the power entrusted to him.

Of the Hon. James McGowan, Minister of Mines and Justice, it may be said that he also serves the purpose for which he was created. His every word and action accentuates the superior natural qualities of the Premier. Mr McGowan is always earnest by virtue of his temperament, and nearly always wrong because of his intellectual limitations and his narrow prejudices. Honest stupidity is but a slight compensation to members who have to wrestle with him for what would be instantly conceded by a Minister possessing Ministerial qualifications and judicial instincts of a high order.

The Hon. W. Hall-Jones, whether active or in repose, is not an inspiring object. Imitation is said to be the sincerest form of flattery, but the form of flattery related to imitation is one that this Minister should never indulge in. His imitation of the vocal and physical qualities of his leader are superlatively ridiculous and never fail to excite the mirth of members. He reaches the high-water mark of mediocrity as a Minister, and his industry is of an order that would win him distinction in China. Sensitive to a degree, he is obviously devoted and grateful to the power that elevated him into his present position, and by these qualities, and his natural lack of positive merits, he adds lustre to the Premier, as it was intended he should when he was drawn from the obscurity where his endowments suffered nothing by the test of comparison with other public men of like merit He exhibits a sort of sensitiveness which always suggests a consciousness of the difficulty of living up to the position he occupies.

The Minister of Lands is just Tammas Duncan, and it would be cruel to criticise him. Possessed of neither grace of mind nor manner, he just holds on to office with both hands. His contempt for the rebuffs and indignities imposed upon him by the Right Hon. the Premier is magnificent. The Premier may push him aside and introduce and explain the provisions of a bill dealing with his department—he may waive him down whilst he is explaining some matter connected with his department in those mellifluous tones which are so well known to members. The Premier may tell members that he will or he will not allow such and such things to be done in the Lands Department. When these and other infringements and invasions of his Ministerial domains are committed by the Premier, the good old Minister of Lands blinks contemptuosly at his Chief from the seat upon which he reclines. It is this forceful Minister who presides over the destinies of the great department of State connected with land. But he does certainly emphasise the importance of the Premier, and in the science of Cabinet-making this purpose is the only one which the Premier apparently considered to be of paramount importance.

Of the systematic and open slights passed upon his colleagues, with the exception of the Hon. Sir J. G. Ward, much could be recorded. My reason for recording anything is because it is necessary that those of the people who are not permitted to know of Parliamentary conditions, except through the spectacles of some newspaper correspondent, should learn in what manner the power of creating page 10 Ministers has been exercised by the Premier.

Again, as in the case of the Legislative Council, I submit that the power of nomination entrusted to the Premier—a power which he should have exercised for national purposes—has been exclusively used to strengthen his personal position in the Cabinet and to magnify unduly whatever administrative ability he himself possesses.

Such use of power is a breach of trust, and justifies us in demanding the constitutional reform which is later on advocated under the title of the Elective Executive. We contend that the deliberate choice of the whole Parliament is certain to produce better results than the arbitrary choice of one man can possible do.

The Premier's plan of Cabinet-making proves that he fears the competition of capable men as Ministers as much as he covets artificial distinction due to the magnifying effects of mediocrity.

Just as the people themselves are the real authors of legislation, so the people themselves can, through the newspaper reports and Parliamentary discussion of legislative proposals, check legislative folly or excess. Legislation is performed in the full light of public opinion and the electors exercise a salutary influence upon it.

Administration is, however, so far as the electors are concerned, carried on in secret. During each session of Parliament some administrative actions performed during the period between one session and another come under review, and criticism from the people's representatives; but only fragments of Ministerial actions in any year ever form subjects for Parliamentary action. It is, therefore, all the more urgently necessary that a generous attitude should be assumed by the people towards those of their representatives who have the ability, inclination and courage to vigilantly scrutinise the quality of the Government's administrative acts. The Government is the trustee for the time being of the colony's affairs, and of its reputation, and your representatives should continuously and strenuously assert their right to protect popular rights and interests.