RIVAL POLICIES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24400, 11 September 1940, Page 8

RIVAL POLICIES

AUSTRALIAN - ELECTION LABOUR LEADER’S PROMISES MR MENZIES* STARK APPEAL (From Our Own Correspondent; SYDNEY, Sept 5. The leaders of the two main. Australian political parties—Mr Menzies (U.A.P.) and Mr Curtin (Labour)— have delivered their policy speeches for the forthcoming election. Mr Men•zies has made no glittering promises —Mr Curtin a. lot of them—though both Insist on full use of the nation’s resources in Australia’s war effort. Mr Curtin was far more moderate than many members uf his parly had hoped for. and attacked the Government on only well-established and traversed grounds of criticism. It contained little to warrant hopes of galvanic leadership Abolition of petrol rationing, increase of the soldier’s basic rate of pay from 5s to 8s a day, and a higher guaranteed price for wheatgrowers were among the items that were obviously bids for votes. In taxation, he promised a transference of part of the heavier wartime burdens from the .vorking class and middlerange incomes to those on the higher scale. Monetary policy included ationalisation of banking and interest rates. Social legislation promised included increases in old-age and widows’ pensions, and family allowances.

Labour’s Bid for Votes

Despite Mi Curtin’s emphasis of Labour’s “inflexible Support of the British cause,’’ Mr Menzies stated that his chief impression of Mr Curtin’s speech was that there really was not a war on, and that consequently the bidding for votes with promises of individual money in hand was going on merrily. “When will the Labour Party realise,” Mr Menzies added, " that our security in what we already have depends entirely on winning the war, and that that is the job which requires the whole of our concentration?” , ■:< ■' . . In spite of its promises of brighter and better days—promises the average man regards in war-time asUtopian—the response from all sections has been lukewarm. The man in the street is suspicious of the story that Mr Curtin told. He is asking: “How with the burden of war-time finance upon us, can Mr Curtin carry out promises which would be lavish even in peacetime? ” There is a widespread belief that the glowing offers Mr Curtin holds but are merely an expression of the catch-cries and political methods which the public in the.-last'few raontbs has shown that it is anxious to discard. Mr Menzies’s Frank Dealing Mr Menzies’s oolicy speech, in contras! with his rival’s, was a stark, austere, appeal for “ a clear and unambiguous authority” to fight the war and win it. He said that the policy of the Government was to organise on a just basis of equality of individual sacrifice all Australian resources so that every ounce of effort should be exerted for Australia’s own safety, the freedom of the British Empire, and the future of the world. Reiterating his offer for a National Government, Mr Menzies said ’ that; it returned to power, he would continhS, to do all he could to induce Labour? “ to share on a full and fair basis the responsibilities of government, and to present to bur common enemies, a united national front.” The choice lor the electors was whether at, this stage authority was to be left with,his Government or handed over ,( to a party or group of parties, largely inexperienced in administration, with mixed ideas about the war. and confused, and ever-changing oolicies in relation to it s conduct.” . “ Our policy has no subtleties or reservations.” Mr Menzies said,., .‘fit means ap all-in war effort, and each man doing hi s bit,. with increased taxes, reduced imports and fe\yer > luxuries.”. , Search fails .to reveal in the policy enunciated fa single political pretext or lavish promise- customary at election time to beguile electors. Everything is staked on the broad and para-, mount promise' to subordinate everything. including mystic formulae, to the prosecution of the war. It may be a poor attempt to woo the electorate, but the sincerity that scorns use of political subterfuge has won widespread approval. * Praise for Leadership . % Indeed, the speech has done much to defeat the criticism that had arisen, especially in Sydney,, of Mr Menzies.S leadership. For, instance, the Sydney Morning Herald, one of the severest critics, praises the speech as an “utterance which - will greatly enhance Mr Menzies’s reputation and strengthen his claim to the-war-time leadership of the nation,, . ' . “The Prime Minister,” the paper adds, “ called on the Australian people to face the stark realities of war, to refuse, to believe that the hard, rough road before them could be smoothed by political devices, : and to choose their future leaders with an . honest appraisement of what their, choice involved. This frank dealing is, suited to the mood of the . electors :to-day. For hundreds of thousands of voters, party catch cries and posturings have lost their meaning. They know :well, enough the danger confronting their country.” ’