MR. CLINKARD'S POSITION.

Rotorua Morning Post, Issue 2, 25 August 1931, Page 4

MR. CLINKARD'S POSITION.

H.

ALEXANDER.

(To the Editor.) I was pleased to see that you were able to publish with the initial issue of the "Morning Post" a Statement from Mr. C. H. Clinkard M.P., setting forth his opinion regarding the present political erisis. It is well that we shoul(| know exactly how our representativas stand at a t'me wheu the welfare of the country demands the earnest consideration of every elector. The respect and personal regard in whieh Mr. Clinkard is held by the electoratc!, coupled with his sincere party 'loyalty, justify us in paylng ciose attention to bis utteranees. But they are, nevertheless, open to drastic eritieism. ' The party Vvhich elaims Mr. Clinkard's alleg'.anee was one of the first to declaim the wisdom of "trusting the people." Democratic legislation placed in the hands of tbe people full rights to govern themselves, and the ballot box was made tbe test 0 the confidence which tbe pe jple felt, or d;d not feel, in the merits of an administration. But now, because'We are faced with a national erisis, our metoiber wishes to take away that right on the eve of an election when the whole Dominion is seething with discontent. From a party »view the move is a wise one, because it would end in the bolstering up of a totterng administration, hut from a rational standpoint it is wr'ong both in principle and policy. Mr. Clinkard is right when he says the times irequire more tban the balancing of the budget. A rational policy with vision, confidence and vigorous acb'vity is needed, and praise Mr. Forhes as we justly may for facing the position, we cannot grasp anything more in his administrative proposals than palliatives. Are we ' tc continue in this pathway of political ineptitude and do no more than tax the man in work to keep the man out of work, or are we going to face the mus'x and put our house in ord.er? Backed by Reform the present Government might easily he able to carry on with charities, taxation and palliatives until the depression passed. At the end of two years the D-onrnion would possibly have ceased to lick its wounds and it might ha fouiid safe to face an election. But why should the people be denied the r\ght to face their own problems right now when the decision is needed? If there is an "overwhelming majority" in favour of a sound national policy Mr. Clinkard should have no felar of an appeal to the people. , The real motive, however, whicb prompts the suggestion of an extended Parliament is the fear that Labour will scare at the polls. That fear* is not unfounded, hut it is no just reason for depriving the people of their electoral right while two dominant parties put their heads togetheir and decide to run the country upon their own lines. Mr. Clinkard's statement that Labour has "repudiated every suggested economy" is so flagrantly incorreci that it could only have been prompted by party bias. • The Labour Party has undoubtedly fought for a fair d'stribution of the taxation burden and endeavoured to save the lower-paid workers from undue hardsb.p, but equally they have clamoured for the protection of a policy which woula give some gltmmer of- hope that the Government had capacity to visualise the necessity for reconstructive measures. Labour has always been willing tc help balance the budget, but like Mr. Clinkard, it wants "mosre than balancing" — it wants poTcy, not palliatives.

I am, etc.,