A BIG LABOUR CONFERENCE

Evening Post, Volume LXXXV, Issue 35, 11 February 1913, Page 6

A BIG LABOUR CONFERENCE

At the present moment New South Wales, which is under a Labour Administration, is exhibiting a phase of government quite distinct from everything that we know of in this country Labour rule in politics means govern ment by the three C's— Cabinet, Caucus, and Conference. -We have mentioned Cabinet first because it is the most widely known governing institution; but as, under the Labour organisation, Conference is the platform-builder, we do not know whether the order of reference of the three C's Bhould nob have been reversed. Perhaps there will be more evidence on the subject when the struggle for supremacy between Cabinet and Conference in New South Wales, a present feature of the daily cablegrams, works oufc to a conclusion. Briefly, Conference, Avhicli consists of the delegates of the Political Labour Leagues of the State, is eeeking to" impose- an inquisition on Cabinet, which is the child of the Caucus of Labour M.P.'sj and though the latter were originally the nominees of the Leagues, it is by the votes of the electors that thejt hold office. A varying degree of responsibility of Cabinet to Caucus, N«w Zealand is accustomed to j but it is strange to this double liability, under which Ministers must keep 1 one eyo on the enfranchised electors and another on the party machine. If the Leagues were simply an. organising in. stitution, and if their Conference legislated simply for their own machinery purposes, there would, of course, be no objection. What constitutes the ground of complaint is that Jthis Conference, elected on the narrow basis of the Leagues, drafts political programmes for the whole country, forcing them upon Labour Caucuses and Labour Cabinets, and thus going behind the wider franchise of the electors. Into the merits of this big question, the obvious pros and cons., now a matter of ancient history in Labour-ruled Australia, we db not propose to go. It is sufficient to point to the "heresy hunt" , as an indication to the people and politicians of New Zealand whither this system of machine politics , leads. Hitherto, we have seen nothing like it in this Dominion. No doubt Mr. Massey iistens most respectfully to the resolutions of the Farmers' Union Conference, but that body has not yet set up an inquisition into his derelictions, and ifc is hardly likely to. As to the late Mr. Seddon, the idea of "his well-trained Liberal-Labour Federation playing the schoolmaster to him would be too absurd. But in New South Wales, "the popular feeling in the Conference is that the Caucus is bound to 1 obey the instructions of the Conference" ; hence, a committee has been set up to enquire into the Blayney by-election (which resulted in favour of the seceding Labourite and ex-Minister, Mr. Beeby), into the peculiar circumstances of the resignation of Mr. Nielsen (another ex-Minister), and into the Shearers' Accommodation Bill (which the Labour Government dropped last session on the plea of obstruction in the Legislative Council). Another grievance, one which caused a split in the Labour following in the House, is tnat the Government, after all its talk about State ironworks, passed a Bill, with the support of the Liberals, enabling the Broken Hill Proprietary Company to establish ironworks at Newcastle. The crux of the case, according to the cablegrams, is that the Conference's committee claims the right to examine the Labour Ministers; who have, however, decided to ignore the "heresy hunt." Coming directly after Mr. Beeby's successful stroke for political freedom, and at a time when the of an independent third party is in the balance, this conflict between Cabinet and Conference is laden with possibilities.