A Pretence Ended.

Hokitika Guardian, 23 February 1922, Page 4

A Pretence Ended.

(Dyttplfon Times). ! In the year 1919., when a general election was. p.epdipgi and.: de cme( i neoessafry by the)- chieftains of Reform .to gut something 5n their programme yo placate the common-people, Mr Mas- j sey hit upon the topical mid attractive j idea ofi promising, to spend £3,000,000 j on the, erection of: homes. The proposal was one of.'the few clear-cut pledges to be found among the bundle of; somewhat shop-soiled generalities concerning integrity, business aptitude, economy., andi such-like abstractions which has always formed the principal stock-in-trade of* Reformers on the hustings. 'The last pretence of fulfilment of this one pledge which promised* to do something for the wage-earning people who iform the greater part of the population has just- been abandoned. The matter -is now to be left to “private enterprise”

and the comments of some of the Reiforin journals on the subject make it quite clear that they think Mr Massey •ought* to lie highly commended for disI honouring bis promise. II The great housing scheme, at its inception, was trusted to a special department- the Housing Branch of the Labour Department—very largely and ; elaborately staffed, and* with a salary 'list which would have been too heavy an overhead charge if the whole programme promised by Air Massey had been carried out. The principal product of the new Department since its

establishment, however, has been, not * houses, but excuses for their, non-ap-pearance. At the first the Department could not get labour then i 6 found it could not get materials; then, when labour and materials were available, both weio too costly, and, finally, when the price of both labour and materials is falling, the Department is suddenly whisked out of existence- presumably j because the manufacture of further excuses is becoming impossible. The public are invited by the Reform apoligisers to admit'e this performance—to be impressed by the sagacity of the Government in discovering that homes for the people cannot be provided by the State and that private enterprise must undertake the task. Of; ;course the Government should have counted the cost before it posed as the friend of the people at* election time. It cannot very w t ll ask its most ardent and* fatuous supporters to admire its failure to do what it promised, unless the whole tiling was am elaborate .iokc played upon the people of this country, a* joke to which only the Reformers were admitted in the early stages. If it is the. courage of the Government in tolling people who want homes to fend for themselves—to depend oil private enterprise—that w e are called upon to greet with loud plaudits, we can only say that Mr Massey and his friends do not take the principle far enough to warrant anyone recognising it as a principle. In matters such as th.o farmers’ wheat, the farmers’ butter, the farmers’ mortgages, and the farmers’ meat, the only references to private enterprise wet have ever heard from the good Reformers have been condemnatory, and their policy marches accordingly. If State syndicalism for the farmer, and private enterprise for the rest of the community is to be the watchword, then we shall know whero we are, but wo must not l>e asked to admire the strange combination. And when the Reformers in a few months’ time make a new bid for the popular support they have never yet obtained wo must not be expected to ; believe that they intend to fulfil their pledges.