“THE PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT”

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 185, 2 May 1940, Page 8

“THE PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT”

The most significant feature of the large meeting of citizens held in the Town Hall on Tuesday evening, under the auspices, of The People’s Movement, was the obvious sincerity and unanimity with which the audience indicated its approval of any denunciation of the encroachments being made in the name of Socialism on. the rights and freedom of the individual. There could be no mistaking the temper of the meeting in this respect. The principal speaker for the evening, Mr. E. R. Toop, in the course of his outline of the objectives of the Movement, said: “Fundamentally, we believe that the less control and restriction, the greater will be the efficiency of the nation; the less interference with individual liberty the higher our culture —our spiritual and material welfare.” Later he amplified this general pronouncement of the principles underlying the movement: “The happiness, health, liberty, security, prosperity and progress of the individual,” he said, “is the most important consideration of all. Hold fast to our liberty and retain the motive power of individual effort, add to that a co-operative spirit, and those things will be assured.” The vigorously appreciative response of the large gathering to these downright declarations afforded ample evidence, if such were now needed, of the widespread resentment against the increasing curtailment of individual rights and the restriction of privileges and opportunities for self-advancement previously regarded as part of a Britisher’s birthright. There can be no doubt that in its genera! objective The People’s Movement can claim to have correctly judged the views and desires of a very large section of the public. It can fairly be said of it, too, that in seeking to focus public attention on the evils which threaten from the policy now being pursued, and in arousing and organizing a sound public opinion to combat those evils, it has been doing a valuable service to the whole community. It is not so easy, however, to find a common-sense justification for the intention clearly indicated on Tuesday evening to convert the movement into a political party organization which will place candidates in the field to contest Parliamentary seats against the existing political parties. Certainly there was what might be regarded as a reservation in the address of the president when referring to the possibility of this course being followed, but the manner in' which he sought to minimize the vote-splitting effects of third party candidates in first-past-the-post elections seems to leave little room for doubt as to what is really in the minds of at least some of the leaders of the movement. The effects of such action would be highly dangerous. They would certainly result in the undoing of much of the good work already accomplished by the movement, and tend to defeat the object aimed at by dividing the voting strength of the rapidly growing body of opinion opposed to socialistic ideas and practices.