STRAIGHT TALK TO LABOUR

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 129, 25 February 1919, Page 6

STRAIGHT TALK TO LABOUR

IN BRITISH ELECTIONS THE RAMSAY MACDONALD BREED CRITICISED Tho British elections, now over, induced a great deal of very straight talk fft'tn the hustings, and naturally, the war and the part played in it by the various factions was extensively used by candidates, with what results the poll has shown. One of tho straightcst talks on labour was delivered by Sir Thomns AVhittaker, a candidate for the Spen Valley (Yorkshire) seat. "I want, said Sir Thomas, "to deal with, the fact that I am opposed by a representative of the Independent Labour Parly, Mr. Myers. I think it is due to you and myself, and only courteous to him, that 1 should examine the grounds on which lie stands, and the policy which ho represents. Mr. Myers is a member of the Independent Labour Party, au associate of (Mr. Philip Snowden, Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald, Mr. F. AV. .Towett, Mr, Morel, and that group. That was the group that opposed the war.' If they bad had their way. we should have failed to take our part in this struggle for freedom, and'failed to dischargo our duty to God and humanity. They declared .that the war , was our fault. It was nothing of the .kind. Everybody knows it was not our fault. The Germans themselves now blame their own Government and admit, the' truth. The group have tried to whitewash Germany all along. Not 'content with that, they thwarted and- hampered us at the' beginning and all through the war. They have defended shirkers,' and justified strikes andstoppages when our men were fighting for their lives. Do you . know this: that we have had groups of men in the country holding Bolshevist views? Wo had men in this country—we have them yet—who did their utmost to break down this war. They held meetings at Manchester on January 2(f and January 27, and at Glasgow on January 28, and they had also meetings in London at which they framed resolutions. They demanded in February, when 'our fortunes were at the lowest, when the Germans were on top—at the moment when ir there was any grit in us it meant that we should set our teeth and get our backs to the wall—this Bolshevist lot framed resolutions demanding that we should consent to an armistice at once. I am not saying Mr. Myers (his Labour opponent) was one ,of them, but that lot is in the Labour Party, and (hey asked tiiat we should accept a Bolshevist lieace—remember that the Bolshevists were in German pay—and that we should join in the negotiations that were going on at Brest Litovsk,where as you will know, ! humiliating terms were, fastened on Russia. If tho Government in February last would not consent to these terms, then the workers of England were to be called upon to declare a general strike and compel, theml The Trade Union workmen of this country had moro 601151+. Some of the miners' leaders took tho same line as the one I have just indicated, but the miners themselves would have 110110 of it. ■ The shop stewards of London would not have it, tho trade unions ' would not have it, or else we should have had that humiliating condition in this country last February. And the leaders of that attempt, several of them; are now standing before constituencies in this;'country as Labour candidates! That lot will piny us false yet if they can. Germany is unropentent, Germany is still scheming, and we need to watch, her closely. (Hear,, hear.) Yon 11111 st' not «end ,to Parliament, to take part in watching Germany, men who have held such mistaken views 'in the past. (Applause.)

The Socialists' Programme. "Now wo will go a little further, and look at the Labour programme which is put forward. Really, it is a Socialist programme, put forward by the Socialists. The truth is they have captured tho Labour machine, and have tticd to capture the co-operative movement. They are energetic; they are earnest and persistent. AVhen meetings or organisations are called.they attend; other people are apt to be careless and indifferent about attending; with the .result that a small minority can 'boss' them. That is what tlie.V have bc«n doing. I have looked carefully through the programme, and have been much interested in trying to sso what is in it. Two things strike me. The first thing is this—that there is no mention of helpfulness, of Christianity, of brotherhood,' of' duty, of effort, of sacrifice, of responsibility.' .Ntf. a trace. They are to contribute, nothing to reconducting our new England. All that they set out to do is to destroy society ns it now exists. Everybody is to do sompthing for them, and theyare not to do anything for anybody, except they can got chailoo to heln themselves to other people's money. President AVilson has recently paid: 'These are days of duty. The duty that, faces all of'us is to servo one another.' That is not in the Labour Party programme. ' "Stolen Thunder." "Tho next thing that strikes me about their programme, with the exception of that portion of it which really means spoliation and expropriation of other people's property, is that -it is stolen iroiu other parties, I was only reading yesterday tho Jirst address I issued as candidate for the Spen A r alley in 1892 and a great deal of it has since been put on the Statute Book. In principle, we have begun most of these things mentioned ig the Labour programme, and tho only question is how' far and when it is expedient to extend them. There is nothing in this programme—nothing inspired, 110 new: heaven on earth'about it. It is stolen thunder/ Let me run through the items of the programme." .The right lion, member then referred 111 turn to the regulations of conditions of labour, the minimum wage, the provision of 1 maternity homes, help for women before and after confinement, mwlical assistance for children; and pointed out what had already been accomplished by legislation in these directions. Ho also recalled that as chairman of tho committee which the House of Commons appointed, he himself drafted the report which led to the establishment of AVuges Board and a minimum wage.Then there was already 011 the Statuto Book national insurance against sii:i-ness and in many trades against unemployment, and there were also Acts wl-ich mado employers liable to pay for accidents. There was' provision for feeding necessitous children and for, ]irovi(iing nurses; and if there were any shortcomings in administration they must blinne the localities and not Parliament.

"Parliament cannot put you to !.ed and feed you," continued Sir l'lionus. "All that Parliament can do is to provide Iho machinery—to stimulate and help people, must do something to help themselves." His objection to this programme was that they were always looking to somebody else to put them to bed. They talked about nationalising services. AVe should be continually doing that, and personally lie thought tho time had come when we should consider the nationalisation of tho railways, the mines, and electric power. Nationalisation' was not a "ew principle; it was simply a matter of extending it. Then as to the taxation of wealth. AA'ell, they had done that! Let them look at the death duties, at tue income tax, at the super tax. A wealthy man paid 10s. (id. in the pound—more than half his income. And wealth was not much unless it brought in an income." Sir Thomas then gave details of tho incidence of taxation. Last year 171 per cent, of the taxation of this country was indirect 1 and B'2-J per cent, direct, anddemonstrated that allowing for the X'3t),ODD,OO(I bread subsidy tho poor were paying nn taxation except what was voluntarily paid for liquor and tobacco.