THE INCOHERENT VOICE

Hokitika Guardian, 15 December 1928, Page 6

THE INCOHERENT VOICE

(IJj “X.“)

In the pre-election contributions to the “Guardian” it may have been noted that 1 carefully avoided any re ft-re nee to the local conditions in Westland. This was unavoidable as though I am on old West Coaster and retain a keen interest in the district, I have been for many years far removed from local inilnenccs. I don’t even know Mr O’Brien or Mr T. Seddon, and have no knowledge therefore of the various influences which have caused Westland to fall out of step with the rest of New Zealand in the great Liberal revival. I naturally assumed from my past knowledge ol I lie consistent -Liberalism ol Westland that it womld have been in the van when Seddoiilan Liberalism again forced itself to the forefront, as the great factor in New Zealand polities. That this eon tide 11 re was misplaced I lie result has shown. But I am perfectly certain that the derision ol Westland was not on the main political issue at all. The responsible electors of West land would have been the last lo ham! over the government, of a. loyal British Dominion to a f om-miinist-So' ialisf party'the leaders of which have been guilty of sedition. And yet that would have been the outcome had New Zealand generally followed the lead of Westland. Forfiinnfelv it, did not do so.

If may be sa.d, the election is now over-—the mistakes made cannot he rectified am! it is no use in In Ik further about them. But flu* puiiOeai i-sue may be luived again at, any time. Therefore f think no analogy is necessary from tho'-c who would endeavour to put before the people the vita! issues on which no! only the prosperity and well are ol the country depends, but its very existence as a responsible unit ot the great British Umpire. If these issues are not grasped the yerdi't *'l the people becomes incoherent, --and dangerous.

Bui though the voice of the Democracy is often rendered incoherent by the side issues which affect loea' verdicts. the past ek-cl ion lias- Ueinonsf rap'd that it can still make itself heard. The result was on the whole as remarkable as it was satisfactory. The people had been fold that there were only two parties---one labelled "Belorm” and one labelled “Labour.” Il was Useless to j:oint out. as a few political economists did. that both I ho'-e labels were mou n i rig less and misleading. It was a case of Coates and Safely v. Holland and Socialistic Communism. But the old saying that you cannot fool all people for all time was ii 'ver more clearly shown. The gag was e'feciive three years ago. bin mil at the past election. 'The vcrdiii -of (lie people has been that, if Die Liberal Party was dead if was quite time il was brought to life again, and this has been done.

To understand the actual position houi-ver ii. is necessary to re'er again to the actual eousfil lit,ion of (lie three pari ics—-“Reform.” “I'uifcd." and “Labour.’’ Not one of these throe labels have auv true political meaning whatever. No ohiect ion no<*d be taken to the term “UnileJ.” If of course has in itself no delinile meaning as il might he the unity of any three or four political factions. B'll il is generally understood Dial ii mi ans United Liberal, and as Liberalism is so broad and eomprehe'-sivo that it permits of Die union pnliDeally of practically all classes of the community, no execution can be fake> i (o Ihe ;iddfi"ii of flic word “United” though it, will nn doubt in Dme lie dron a-d as snnerl!nous. Willi ‘D‘eforiti” and “Labour” however—-pa rtienhirlv with lhe killer- tin* case is dilferenl. and it is Die utterly misleading label ol ‘•Labour" which lias been unferl unafelv cd'e'-live ill fooling

Lite poopm in su<-!i an- extent that ;i |>;»rty li*« 1 by it low labour ngil :i{«>rs. i'li'l ro;i|!y ro pro-son tiny vonml liing from itvn In novel] per cent of' I In' t)0:)t:l;Uioii Inis secured somo niiioioon soots in the Dominion Pn rl i;i inc*ii Not only in Now Zealand but tlimttghonf, I lie llritisli Empire is the siiiiic

"IfroL not it cable, ■ and the o;inso must bo investigated if llit; danger which otboiwiso 111 roa tens our oxisLonoo is lo iio iivorl.od.

Revert inor, however. first to “Reform.” Tlio name w;is adopted I>y Mr Massey wlimi lii' look ovor tlio loadorsliii) of tlio Conservative I’artv from Sir William Russell. I'p to ilint iim t > tlio Conservatives bad fought under tlioir own flag. ]sut the long and successful innimrs of tlio Liberals un-

der Ballanoo. Seddon and Ward had shown that the Consorva.tivos as :i party would never be likely to oome into power again, particularly as they discredited through their opposition to the Liberal land policy, tho labour legislation, and the old ago pensions. To eonnieraot this. I am ‘-orry to say—for it is painful to rake no old, exploded and refuted scandals—elm roes of all kinds wore made against the Liberal Government, and its leaders individually. T have those charges now before me. and they are painful reading. The less s; id about them now the hotter. Hut the impression conveyed and intended to ho convoyed, was that there had been corrup-

tion and maladministration on the part of the Liberal Government. The appeal of Mr Massey to the people was to give him the cr portnnity to ‘‘go through th(> pigeon-holes.” so that ho could show up th“ wrong doing of the old Liberals. This was ali going to ho “reformed" and—-to cover up the real origin, and the real Conservative driving force behind his party—the name changed to “lie-

form.” Eventually by a clover hit of political jugglery—if pc-Llk-d jv. o Jery

can ever be called clever—and assisted by Idle “ratcine” of' three Liberal members whose action will never be forgiven by an\ true conscientious Liberal, .Mr .Massey was given bis ehan.ee. The result was as might have been anticipated. Nothing to prove the unfounded charges—or inuendoes was ever produced from tiie pigeon lioies, and the ‘-'reformers” having well and trillv fooled the people established themselves in power. No attempt was ma.de (o reiorm anything of course bur the further attempt to fool the people* into the beliel that “Helorin and “Liberalism” were one and the same only, met with temp -rary success owing to the old adage that you cannot fool ail the people for all time. Such is the true history of “I’elorm and its meaningless name which must alwavs be an anathema to all true Liberals. If there is no word of warning more urgently mpi'iivd 1 In*it another just now, it is that under no cireinn.Ma nees whatever should ibeie la l any fusion between Liberalism and deform between the party a licit ins been tvliahifaled and the parlv which Inis been discredit's!. '! here c many reasons lor this, suite ol w-iieh i uill lai'-r refer to. but it s!i*>" I■l ha ’’(lident for t lie present to m ‘ - that ihe Holland party (eauionllaged a- Libonr) regards sueli fusion ns the l 1 sum necessary if the Communist-) alist party is to become again a factor in New Zealand polities, or regain the pod! ion of odidai Opposition. Tile three party system is now i '*<* onlv practicable and sale out* for New Zealand. I have referred to the party i,abds. and it, is worth noting that Ha- party which gained the confidence of flic de'-iors was the only partv with Ihe label of (rue political significance .. |be Liberals. the oilier niixtu'es wild rerptire .sorting out into their component part s, lu-iorm will lia\<to go Lliroiigli Hie si rainer to separate out the Conservative from the Libera! elements. Tiie Conservatives will find goad work to their band as the ( onservative wing ol ihe Liberal party, as in years oast, and the Liberals must jodi up with their proper party under their proper name. Tim same will apply to “Labour” though in this ease probably a simple strainer will not suffice, and an anrdytical chemist will be required to separate out the poisonous and dangerous ingredients. T Ik* main ingt-e----dient eveti in this ease will lie found to be Liberalism however as conscientious “Labourites” like Yeiteh have shown however and T believe New Zealand can confidently lock lonvard to ilie time when the great Liberal partv will have unchallenged control of the destinies of the country. While the indications all point when parties are properly sorted out and lane lied we should find the Liberals the numerically powerful and controlling party with tile Conservatives on one win" and sufficiently strong, it may be hoped to form the official On-position—-a nd the ilLudieal-F'imnlist Communists party on the other to eon liter-bain nee the (’onsorvati\e iu(iiiences. It. is not necessary neither nia,y it be advisable that even tin- Liberals should be. numerically superior to all other parties combined but it is essential they should have a reliable working majority, which it. would anpear they have secured even in the present Parliament and as a. result u| an election in which conditions were particularly unfa von ruble to obtaining a <-!<»:<>• mandate from the people on tile real political issues. In this direction however if is well to remember that Kir •) os pi i Ward may at. nnv l jpie find liimsell in an untenable position. In one of the first divisions Labour voted w'iHi the Reform Opposition and if lie finds lie is to bo in any way subiool to Ihe dictation o! ;my unholy alliance between i’elorm jmd Labbur Ih.e Pr'emier w:ll probably appeal at om e to t lie count ry. Yore Is** |.o do so. the Liberal party would almost 'certainly I"' retained with a. largely increased majority. As the other parties know tuis. it. is unlikely they uill wish to force the position. Hut it is well the peojile sliould be ready for any political emergency, and to deal witli the imperlnut issues involved. II is advisable therefore t.o amilyse the causes' which have led to (fie voice of Democracy being incoherent and flic mandate <:•! the people be jug obscured by side issues. Ibis will probably always bo the weakness ol democracy, and must b<- guarded against in (-very possible way. While ibis weakness was plainly apparent at last election it is marvellous that tinverdict given for Liberalism was as clear amt definite, as it was'under conditions so unfavourable, it is obviously impossible to toll bow certain sections of the people may be swayed, or how the results may be atloetod in any particular constituency, but speaking generally and of the community as whole tin- adage of lbiUance and Soddon lias again justified itseii, and it is evidently safe to “Trust the People.”