BAY OF PLENTY BEACON Published Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. MONDAY, MAY 16, 1949 LABOUR AND THE LAND

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 13, Issue 87, 16 May 1949, Page 4

BAY OF PLENTY BEACON Published Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. MONDAY, MAY 16, 1949 LABOUR AND THE LAND

Mr S. W. Smith, M.P. for Hosbson, has strongly criticised Government land policy, which he says is steadily progressing towards its original avowed objective of State ownership of land. That statement will have a mixed reception. One can imagine some of the old Labour stalwarts who still

believe that the Labour Party is a Socialist party greeting it as a hopeful sign on a dark horizon that someone 'shares their faith.

There are others who will agree that the Government does indeed intend to wash out freehold tenure of land altogether. To that extent, opinion in this democratic country is still free. We are still at liberty to speculate as to the intentions of a Party whose actions have very often not followed its expressed intentions.

Though there are many, including nearly all the avowed ■adherents of the National Party, who believe the Labour Party to be Socialist in intention, there are many of the rank and file of its supporters who claim it is not nearly Socialist enough in action, and say that the policy the country so heartily endorsed in 1935 was a lot more Socialist than the line that has been followed since then.

At any rate, it seems reasonably certain that Mr Smith’s allusion to Communism in the same breath, as it were, with which he accused the Government of being Socialist, will Cause , little panic. , .

Whatever the Government may be—and that is certainly not always clear—it is definitely not Communist. Whatever the two Parties might have had in common years ago, they are a long way apart right now. For one thing, it has never been the way of Communists to shrink from strong action in cases of industrial unrest. Perhaps it is as well for the troublemakers the Government will not take a leaf from the Red book.

Again, the Labour Party throughout its term of office, has carefully stuck to orthodox capitalist finance by borrowing at interest. True, there have been some minor tamperings with orthodoxy that have caused some criticism, but our economy is essentially capitalist still.

Had Mr Smith wanted to make a comparison, perhaps he could have recollected another European political system, based on controls and interference with individuals’ rights within the framework of capitalism. But why worry with such comparisons? What New Zealanders want to hear from both sides of the political fence this year is not brighter and better Party bickering, but constructive ideas for making New Zealand a better country to live in. So far that is missing in the preliminary campaigning.

Certain it is that most of us do not want Socialism of the totalitarian brand. Most of us are pretty well satisfied that capitalist democracy can and will work.

We believe a man has the right to own what he works for, and to pass it on to his family if he wishes. We believe the man with capital has the right to set up a private enterprise and employ others for their benefit as well as his and the country’s. But we also believe it should never be necessary in a country as productive as this for anyone ever to be in want. We believe no man has the right, because he has been more fortunate, to exploit another’s misfortune.