UNKNOWN

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 9, Issue 589, 3 December 1920, Page 2 (Supplement)

UNKNOWN

ANGER OF DIVIDED COUNSELS.

There are now four distinct pares in the political life of this Dolinion—the Reform Government arty, the Official Liberals (if the arty led by the Hon. T M. Wilford lay be so designated), the Progresses or dissentient Liberals, opposed > Mr. Wilford's leadership and the fficial Labour Party, acknowledging [r. H. E. Holland's leadership in the ouse of Representatives. In addion there are the Independents, who iay or may not elect at some future ate to join one or other of the partes* mentioned. Outside of Parliaent a fifth party is forming amongst le farmers. Auckland farmers have »ng hankered after a Farmers' Party, though they have been well served f such farmer representatives as le late Mr. Kirkbride, Mr. L. R. hillipps (a former 1 president of leir provincial executive), and thers, and who have .representing lem the JKtkoe MinfttSi? the Speaker f the House of Representatives (Sir redeHck Lang), Sir William Herries, le Hon. Mr. Coates, all of whom ave been or are still actively interred in farming pursuits, to say noring of Mr. F. Mander and Mr. R F. ollard, whose business interests are isociated with the farming industry, 'ithin the last year or so the agiition in favour of forming a distinct id separate Farmers' Party in the uckland province has been prosecut--1 more vigorously, and, it is now ;ated, the movement is gathering msiderable strength, and may play i important part in future elecons. At best, however, it can only ive a disrupting influence upon the meral community by placing yet wther party in the field to join in le vote-splitting game which, in ueensland, has replaced in power id authority a Labour Government ngularly implacable 1 in its treatment ' the rural producing interests. The irmers of New Zealand could hardly tve a better object lesson of the >ssible effect of their policy in formg a separate party here than is afrded by the recent general elecMis in Queensland and Victoria. In »th States the verdict of the elects has gone against the Labour exemists, yet in Queensland the latr remain in office, and in Victoria coalition between the Farmers', or >untry, Party, and the Government ;S had to be arranged in order to ert the defeat of the latter at the nds of Labour.

The Position in Queensland.

In Quensland, Mr. Edward Charles lepdore, the State Premier, has been 'ro% a practical notice to quit. He pealfji to the electors against the nd<#r capitalists, who refused to jecribe to further loans for the irthern State until it abandoned its nfiscatory legislation. The Queeijgid Premier's offence was very real, i had persisted in passing legisla»n varying the terms and conditions certain leases of station properties d for given periods, by companies lich had taken them over when sir former holders were unable to itinue financing them on account successive droughts, and the heavy ses of stock which were incurred jreby. Twice the Legislative Counrefused to pass the measure and, both occasions, the then Governor Queensland (Sir A. H. Coold Ad- £) refused to sanction the appointnt of additional members to the uncil to secure its passage. When s Governor left Queensland at the i of his term of office, and Mr. lliam Lennon, an erstwhile member the Ministry and Speaker of the sembly, was made Lieutenant-Gov-lor, 14 Labour members were apnted to the Council, and with their istance the repudiatory and con:atory legislation of which the idon financiers complained was encd.

Result of Vote-Splitting. n the recent elections, although Labour Government secured, a jority of the seats (38 against 34 & by the Opposition), it only ob<ied 164,000 votes at the polls, linst 185,000 polled by its oppons, a sure proof that it no longer »ins the confidence of the country i, but for the unfortunate splitting the votes in certain electorates, it aid have been unquestionably deted. In Victoria, again, while the roon Government has met with reses, mainly through the entry of i Farmers' or Country Party into } political arena, the elections have pssitated a coalition between the mers' Party and the Nationalists, erwise the Government position lid have been untenable. An Unfortunate Position.

)i Queensland, Mr. Theodore retains Premiership; but, as a Sydney er has pointed out, whereas in late Parliament he commanded a ority of 20 votes in a House of nembers, he "scrambles back with iggarly majority of four." In 1918 party was the choice of 180,000 tore, as against 156,000 on the >r side; his 180,000 supporters s dwindled to 164,000, while his

156,000 opponents have swelled to 185y000. He has lost 16 votes in Parliament and 45,000 in the country, and he remains Premier as the representative of minority rule; which the Bulletin rightly says is "dead against Labour principles, if there are any Labour principles left." His position is made worse by the fact that "his party owes its retention of office without honour to inflated rolls and a grossly undemocratic distribution of seats. It contrived somehow to enrol 65,000 more electors than the Federal electoral officers were able to discover nine months before; .the supposition, being that a considerable proportion of the 65,000 were migratory and mutiplied cane-cutters, navvies and so forth, who invariably vote for Labour. Being on more rolls than one they were able to transfer their votes from Labour candidates who didn't need them to others who were hard put to it to hold their seats. There is also a suspicion that some of these useful nomads carried their enthusiasm or forgetfulness so far as to mark as many ballot papers as they could get hold of, an amiable indiscretion which is easy to practice antf difficult to trace. And (adds the Bulletin) undoubtedly the crowd in office profited by and meant to profit by the distribution of seats, and by an arrangement of boundaries that had grown shockingly lop-sided and obsolete. In the result it got its dishonest advantage at the cost of glaring anomalies, the character of which is best explained by the fact in 20 constituencies returning 10 Ministerialists and 10 Oppositionists, the votes polled for the former totalled 44,756, while the Oppositionists secured 59,464 votes. The Bulletin gives the figures in detail, showing that the Oppositionists won 10 seats with 49,572 votes out of 78,926 polled in the constituencies returning them, while the 10 Ministerialists only secured 15,402 votes out of a total of 25,294- The highest vote polled by any of the 10 Ministerialists was 2290, the lowest 883; whereas, on the Opposition side, the highest vote was 6351 and the lowest 3182. It took, on the average of the 10 seats, 495.7 votes to elect an Oppositionist and only 1540 votes to return a Ministerialist. In this practical but decidedly ingenious way does Labour, as represented by the Theodore Government of Queensland, secure its end and serve democracy. The Bulletin appropriately enough hits off the situation with a cartoon depicting a ghastly company of deadheads whom "Theodore and Filhelly thank for their majority," the deadheads being represented by a formidable array of skeletons surrounding the platform from which Mr. Theodore is speaking.

The New Zealand Position.

The farming vote in this country is not sufficient in itself to secure the election of a Farmers' Party commanding a majority in Parliament, and although certain Labourites are assiduously courting and angling for the vote of the "small farmer," the two have so little in common, and the Australian experience has shown that Labour in office is at such little pains to study and help purely rural industries and the producers generally, that no enduring alliance that would be at all helpful to the farmer can be looked for in that direction. According to the last census only. 12.05 per cent, of the people of New Zealand were engaged in the agricultural, pastoral, mining and other primary producing industries as breadwinners. How futile then it is for the farmers to assume that as a separate party they could ever hope to command a Parliamentary majority such as would enable them to take over the direction of our national affairs. Clearly it js better for them to remain in alliance with one or other of the parties at present in existence. To start a fifth party, running its own candidates, would simply mean handing the country over to the extremists, whose vote is a solid one and concentrated upon its own candidates alone.