THE LABOUR NEW MINISTRY

Hokitika Guardian, 13 November 1929, Page 2

THE LABOUR NEW MINISTRY

(Sydney Bulletin)

No matter how generously the gentlemen opposite may treat it, and no matter how cordial the good wishes of the vast majority’ outside, the Commonwealth’s new Labour Ministry,can expect "110 smooth passage. It enters upon .its task handicapped by the deficit of five millions, tlie state of, the money market, Mr Theodore’s election pledges (“Labour will reopen the coalmines and abolish the amusement tax”) a Left Wing already clamorous for the spoils, and a hostile majority in the Senate,

, A further disadvantage is that the Prime Minister and all the members of his party are new to Federal Office. Certainly Messrs Theodore, Lyons, Guy and McTiernan have had administrative experience in their several States. Mr Theodore was Premier of Queensland, and Mr Lyons Premier of Tasmania, for some years. But running the Commonwealth e-pecially when there are 27 Nationalist-Cocky Senators, and no hope in the wide world of abolishing the Senate, is a much harder job. And in any case, it was impossible for all the gentlemen with State experience to he picked for portfolios. Men like Messrs Anstey, Brennan, Fenton, McGrath, Maloney, Edward Riley, Watkins and Green strove jor Labour in its darkest days and had first claim for reward.

But nearly all these gentlemen are beyond the age at which a new job can be readily learned. For 13 years their party has been condemned to a sterile opposition. Attacking the Government has become a settled habit with all of them, and three months ago it seemed certain that attack would continue to be their rather dismal role until the end of 1931 at least. Now these destructive critics grown elderly have to try to become constructive statesmen. They have been suddenly called upon to guide the destinies of the nation in times as trying as it has ever experienced. Trained only to pull down, they have of necessity now undertaken to build up—to shape policies on a multitude of subjects, arrive at Ministerial decisions, and defend them in Parliament and in the country. It is not the way to get the best out of them, from the party’s standpoint or the Commonwealth’s. Perhaps before long Mr Sc-ullin will be driven to admit that there is a lot to be said for Elective Ministries. Experience in an Elective Ministry would have saved at least some of bis colleagues from the vexat'ous incident to floundering in unfamiliar parts. As it is, the necessary experience will be painfully and expensively acquired; and the people will have to stand the racket.