Pledges and Politics.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19161, 18 November 1927, Page 10

Pledges and Politics.

A correspondent writes to us upbraiding us for condemning the giving of pledges on the liquor question by political candidates. He represents us as having suggested that candidates may give pledges to " farmers' unions, trade " unions, or Reform unions," but " must "not under any circumstances give " pledges to the N.Z. Alliance." The subject of our article was the giving of pledges to the Alliance, and we did not think it necessary to do more than use this case as a striking example of a noxious practice. In order, however, as we hoped, that there should be no misunderstanding, we took the precaution of saying that while there was no means of preventing " any sectional " organisation " from issuing questionnaires and asking for pledges, there was nevertheless a method whereby these sectional pressures could be checked; and our proposal was that the political Parties should refuse official recognition and support to any candidate who did not refuse " to give "pledges on any matter outside the " official Party programme." That ought to have been clear enough for anybody, but since there are Prohibitionists who are suspicious and fanciful, we had better say that the objections we urge against the Alliance's questionnaire and demand for pledges apply with equal force in the case of every other sectional and particularist organisation whatsoever. We have urged these objections in some of these cases on earlier occasions, as, for example, when the northern section of the Fanners' Union endeavoured to establish a movement for the mobilising of opposition to candidates who would not agree to certain policies affecting the farmer, or when the Industrial Associations threatened similar action against members who would not support high protection. Sectional inter-

ests are constantly taking this line. On Wednesday, for instance, the chairman of the executive of the South Island Motor Union declared that the Union should " enter the political arena to " watch the interests of motorists "; and this could mean nothing unless it meant that the Union should mobilise opposition to such candidates for Parliament as would not subscribe to the Union's demands (demands which, as it happens, are in themselves reasonable). What kind of Parliament should we have, what kind of corporate representation of the nation, what measure of honesty, straightforwardness, and intelligence in our Legislature, if political candidates were to be obliged to consider threats from this, that, and the other sectional organisation? What kind of government could be expected if the Dominion were to turn into a congeries of groups each of which would regard its own particular interest as of greater importance than all the great mass of other interests combined? The result would be confused and degraded politics and rank misgovernment.