The Dominion THURSDAY, MAY 29, 1919. SOLDIERS AND POLITICAL ACTION

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 209, 29 May 1919, Page 4

The Dominion THURSDAY, MAY 29, 1919. SOLDIERS AND POLITICAL ACTION

A wise . decision was reached at the annual conference 9f the New Zealand Beturned Soldiers' Association yesterday, when a proposal to convert the association into a political organisation was rejected by a large majority. It was indicated on behalf ,of those who favour political action that the decision was not accepted as final, and that the question would be raised again next year, but at seems likely that the wisdom of. adhering to the present non-political constitution of the association will .appear more and more clearly as time goes on. To tho dispassionate onlooker it is already manifest that in declining to enter the political arena the association has weathered a dangerous crisis in its career, and escaped all but certain shipwreck. No one, of course, would dream of suggesting that returned soldiers are in any way disqualified from the most active participation in public life. On the contrary, there is every reason to believe that' as a result of the broadening experience they have undergone their resumption of civilian status will tend in a most important degree, to revivify the politics of the Dominion and open new possibilities of progress. It may be taken for granted also that no'candidates will henceforth have a better chance of election 'to Parliament than those who are returned soldiers, assuming that they are at the same time endowed with' the all-round qualifications wlr.ch make for useful political service. No doubt in any case where a popular returned 'Spldicr is standing for Parliament those who have shared his experience of active service will rally freely to his support. But it is from a broad standpoint of citizenship that returned soldiers should resume political activity, whether as candidates or electors, and an attempt'to—make the circumstances of transition from soldier to civilian status the basis of political organisation is hopelessly narrow and illadvised.

As they are reported, the advocates of political action in, yesterday's debate made , out an exceedingly poor case. What they had to say about unredressed grievances of returned soldiers was largely beside the. point. The question at stake was not whether such grievances existed, but whether the association would bo more likely to secure tiw redress of grievances by becoming a political body than by adhering to its present constitution. 1 . A considerable pronortion of those who favoured the change argued that political action need not' entail party action, and that the association would best advance the interests of its members by demanding specific pledges from Parliamentary candidates. 'At a cursory view this proposal may seem to hold little that is objectionable. In fact, 'howover, it was well calculated, as one delegate at least pointed out, to place the association in the, hands of political adventurers of the most undesirable type. As he said, there are amongst politicians "unscrupulous and pernicious pot-hunters-men who would use the association for their own ends. They would promise their souls or their shirts and yet soldiers would pet nothing." The language is more forcible than elegant,,but the facts stated are pertinent. Demands made by 'returned ■soldiers or in their behalf very often entail a considerable call on public funds. The politician who is only concerned about catching votes would readily promise practically anything in reference to such demands, while candidates of a more conscientious stamp would be chary of committing themselves until the merits of the question could bo examined in detail and with the fullest information in hand regarding the practicability of doing what -was desired. In practice, a policy of exacting pledges of this nature from political candidates would of necessity tend to identify the association with the least desirable elements in politics and to set it in antagonism to the better class of public men who decline to commit themselves blindfold and insist upon exercising independent initiative. Obviously it is to. politicians of this latter type that returned soldiers must look to secure satisfaction of their legitimate claims and grievances. It thus appears that even if apparent safeguards were established the association could not .undertake political action without sacrificing the strong and advantageous position it now holds.

_ From whatever angle the question is viewed, the conclusion seems inevitable that its non-political constitution is an important part of the foundation of the present strength and influence of the association. There is decisive weight in the contentions raised by those who opposed an alteration of the constitution that , it would lead inevitably to internal dissensions, and at the same time would mean the loss of the all but unanimous public support now given to the association. There is no doubt that if it attempted to marshal its members in support of a particular political faction or factions the association would antagonise sections of the public who arc in full sympathy with its objects' of obtaining justice for returned soldiers and their satisfactory re-esfcablishmcnt in civil life. But it is doubtful in any ease if such action could be taken without wrecking the association from within, or at all events splitting it into opposed sections. Political action by the association on such lines as were proposed by the

minority in yesterday's debate would entail of necessity, an i?ttampt to constrain the political inclinations of its members, and undoubtedly any attempt of the kihd would be resented and would give rise to incurable dissensions. As a delegate pointed out during tho debate, the men who went to the war were of all shades of political opinion. They arc united in a determination to secure particular objects, but there is no reason to suppose, that they arc any better able than they were formerly lo see eye to eye in regard to general political questions. The- political project is in fact a particularly injudicious attempt to deflect the association from the sound policy it has thus far pursued and from which it has everything to hops.