Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 1 December 1922, Page 2

It is impossible to consider the prospects of the Labor puny in New Zealand. without a thought crossing the mind ns to the Ilk iis-ire (if sin-cess they have achieved in other countries, where they were placed i.i power. Across the Tasman Sea. we have various examples of Labor * iovci iiinciit, and the results are not at ail inspiring. Mr IV. H. Hughes, Prime Minister of tlie Commonwealth, in a speech last month at Bendigo said: “Tlie Labor Party had been turned down because its members were no longer inspired by those ideals which they believed in when at each election they obtained fresh support. Tbev w.ro imbued with foreign doctrines, winch were alien to ns. They had betrayed u.\ during the war, and were recreant to the Empire. In Queensland where the only Labor Government remained, the waters were rising rapidly, but there was no Ark and no Noah ibis tine .” The attitude of the Labor party pally m New Zealand is not in keeping with the patriotic spirit which predominates in the Dominion. Their principles in regard to patriotism : s out to touch with the puhiic sympathises in that direction. The Extreme Labor parly has not displayed any enr'ni-u-isni for vvbat the people believe is a prime necessityconstitutional rule. Mr Holland passed bis judgment on the seamen’s trouble the other night, and held that the seamen wore right in flouting the court set up by the lav.- of the land! What the seamen aie doing is causing loss ami unemployment all round, yet Mr Holland blames the administration of tlie laws of Parliament for the trouble. Labor, as interpreted bv Mr Holland, wants the halni’-e always i.i its favour, right, or wrong The seamen may be* right or they may bo wrong—they have not spoken for themselves.—but the wav .Mr Holland put the case, placed the seamen offside, .or bis explanation was that the men were out to defy the law That is unconsitutional and is not '.be course wlii’-li the hulk of the public favoi.

Any serious a e-e-css i.in of strength tei the Labor party as led by Mr Holland is a matter w n th contemplating in regard to many aspects of the Labor programme. The land policy of Mr Holland as explained bei- the otlieir evening is designed to place a fixed value on land—and that is the end ol the* owner’s interest for all time. He may not 'sell to any belter advantage, (except as regards compensation for actual improvements), be the circumstances what they may. Such a proposal cannot commend itself to a country, such as New Zealand, and least off all to Westland, where land is so costly to bring into profit. The mail on the land under this dead level scheme of State values, would h:fvo no incentive to improve * he laud value itself. He would find his land valued at a certain figure, ind there would he no inducement for enterprise. Under such conditions a reign ol stagnation in regard to the land development must ensue. As commented on by a contemporary, it -m ownet wishes lo sell his land he must, under tins .scheme, apply to -die Government to purchase it from him. The State must buy when requested, and pay for the land at the iegistere.l valuation, plus the value of any improvements. There is no correlative right apparently for the State to acquire compulsorily at the registered valuation figures, hut that is a mere matter of detail. The principle underlying the scheme is. of

course, that the State, and not the individual shall ho entitled to any unearned increment. Individual effort and enterprise will be stifled.

Tjio.sk who feel disposed to support the Liberal candidate at the poll next Tnursday, will have the satisfaction ot aiding the return of a representative who will do them every credit in Parliament. With to-day issue there is circulated a leaflet which contains an interesting review of the Liberal policy which from all accounts is going to be the peoples’ popular policy on polling day. It is a safe and sound policy, giving as Liberal principles always have fair and equitable consideration for all, and an equal opportunity for all to excel. Reform lias been “window-dres-sing” for the past ten years, as it has been rather aptly commented on, in reference to its policy, but all the fail promises are being earned over front year to year, from election to election, unfulfilled. No one knowing the hisI torv and the ability of the Liberals in the past—whether during the time of ! the Ballance-Seddon-Ward, or in the period of the National Cabinet —can say justly that the Liberals have failed. They did for New Zealand everything j that was possible in the face of most ! strenuous opposition. And they can bo : trusted to do their national duty equnljTv faithfully in the future. In the preI sent contest it is manifest that the | Liberals will make some gains. They are “coming back,” of that there' is 1 no doubt, despite vested interests and ■ other superlative influences operating i against them. In any case, the officid j Opposition should be a strong one, in 1 preference to a numerically strong Government. The latter can afford to lie passive and not progressive unless the Opposition is there to spur it tin. And the Liberals by their proved loyalty and sound record, is the party best able to urge and ultimately to seclne those sound progressive conditions which the country needs. It were well therefore, to vote Seddon and keep Westland Liberal.