“A STAGE PROPERTY.”

Taranaki Daily News, 23 November 1922, Page 8

“A STAGE PROPERT Y.”

LABOR AND DEMOCRACY. THE PLAGUE OF’ “GO-SLOW.” The opening address of Mr. L. M. Tsitt, M.P. for Christchurch North, wks ’ characterised by a sledge-hammer attack on the extreme wing of the Labor Party. He said the extremists mouthed about democracy when it suited the party’s ..purposes. It was a stage property, taken up or dropped as the moment demanded. Tn a land where' adult franchise prevailed, these men approved of direct action in lieu of legislative action. What was the one big union but a‘means of substituting the strike for the ballot.box? Tie admitted that there was a difference of opin inn bet ween the Labor members of Parliament and industrialists, but he had never hoard the Labor !members condemn the “go-slow” policy. They were out to destroy the present ! Parliamentarv svstem and substitute an “industrial Parliament,” whatever that was. The candidate asked if those methods looked like Constitutional reform. He was antagonistic to extreme Labor because it was disloyal and refused to honor the King, because it hurled vulgar .insults at the Prince of Wales, flouted the flag, and was bent on breaking up the British Empire.. Direct action was i inexcusable, because the people of the Dominion had universal suffrage. “Yet. I the poor, silly fellows did not have {he | sense not to go on strike just before an i election.” He was opposed to Labor ' extremism because it had into this country, as elsewhere, the most subtle, mischievous, and disgraceful form of sabotage—“go slow.” He (

wished he had the ability to describe an : pvil like “go slow” as it ought to be J described, so that every man and woman would fight it as they would fight the plague. He would rather see his son j return from the war shattered and suffering, to drag out the rest of his time jn pain and impotence, than see him ! turn into a miserable “waster” such as i must result from this “go-slow” busi- ! ness. ' Had any Labor leader condemned “go ’slow”? he asked. They denied its existence. but as regards its moral effect • they had maintained a criminal and j cowardly silence.’ He was antagonistic to Labor extremum because of its : grossly materialistic and antagonistic < • spirit. He did not intend to introduce seetaiianism into politics. There had i been too much of that, but after all, I : they lived in a Christian country. How ! could the Rev. J. K. Archer (who is the T.abor candidate for Christchurch North) pose as a Christian Socialist and ; ! say that his leader was Christ and not ' I Mr. Holland, seeing that be (Mr. ArI chdr) was a Labor extremist? Mr.]