OVERSEAS COMMENTS ON ELECTION

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 70, Issue 45, 3 December 1949, Page 5

OVERSEAS COMMENTS ON ELECTION

MOTIVES FULLY DISCUSSED v • D /*■ (N.Z.P.A.—Copyright.) LONDON, December 2. The Result of the New election continued to be the • subject of comment in most British, Australian, Canadian and American newspapers to-day.-

* Some newspapers expressed doubts whether the defeat of the New Zealand Labour Party indicated a defeat for Labour in the coming elections in Australia and Britain. The “News Chronicle,” London, says that though Conservative supporters in Britain and Australia were celebrating the National Party’s victory with loud hosannas, seeing it as a promise of similar glad tidings in their own countries, the political moral could be misleading. “The Nationalist victory is really the result of the swing of the political pendulum,” it says. “The Labour administration, as even its best friends would admit, had i grown old and stale. Above all, however, New Zealand appears to have voted against controlled and planned economy at a time of considerable national prosperity. It remains to be seen whether in this country, which is far from prosperous, the same .motives will apply.”

The New Zealand correspondent of the “Daily Herald” attributes the defeat of the Minister of Supply ' (Mr A. H. Nordmeyer) and the Minister of Agriculture (Mr E. L. Cullen) partly to their efforts to enforce butter rationing in New Zealand to assist-exports v to Britain. - The London correspondent of- the “Manchester Guardian” reports that even some Labour members at Westminster fear that Mr Fraser’s defeat in New Zealand indicates that a political trend is setting against Labour generally. “The Leader of the victorious Na- - tional Party in New Zealand (Mr S. G- Holland) has, in his pronouncements since the election results were announced, shown both modesty and good sense,” says the “Evening News” in a fading article. “In one of his , first comments upon his victory he spbke forthright good sense about the British Empire—and-meet welcome of all—he talked about the British Empire, not about some wishy-washy half synonym devised to ; calm the susceptibilities of Bengali and Brahmin* and in the pathetic delusion that those who hate the British Empire and seek to destroy it will be persuaded it really does not exist. Too many Socialists made a tardy and reluctant' discovery of the British Empire; nervous in their conversion, they prefer the * new foggier name for it. It is heartening as well as aptly symbolical that the man who has ao soundly trounced them in New Zealand should at once use the old, true word.”

Effect of Conscription Issue

Comments in U.S. -« g an Francisco newspapers gave front-page prominence to the results of the election. Typical headlines were: The '“Examiner”: “Voters upset . Socialist rule in N,Z; Refusai to Cut Taxes and Controls .Ousts t Labour Regime;” the “Chronicle-Inde-pendent”; “Labourites are Ousteffi New Zealand’.} Regime -Beaten Afte, •j. ' The "Ottawa Gazette” said that the

The Commonwealth correspondent of the “Daily Minor,” in a special article headed “Tories Take Over New Zealand,” says the New Zealanders’ explanation of the change is that they “like to give the other Jbloke a chance.” The world will wait to see if New Zealanders share the same national profits under a National Government as they did'during their 14 years of Labour rule. The foreign editor of the Communist “Daily Worker” says that the policy of the New Zealand Labour Party, as with Labour ' in Britain, contained nothing that would carry the working class one inch nearer socialism. The newspaper does not mention that all Communist candidates in New Zealand lost their deposits. vei%ict would be misunderstood if it was interpreted anywhere as a rejection of socjal security. “It is a change of managers. There is much that will endure in Labour’s achievements. New Zealand has come to occupy a special place in political thought and the affections of people everywhere.”

Labour Party speakers in Sydney to-day said that the conscription issue in New Zealand had caused a serious division of opinion in the New Zealand Labour Party and that this had been reflected in the polls. At another meeting, Mr Calwell elaborated on his policy of compulsory military training. “You have been told by the newspapers to-day that the main ; reason for the defeat of the Labour Goyernment was the adoption of the conscription issue. If the New •Zealand Government was defeated because of the conscription referendum then I challenge Mr Menzies, who has often advocated conscription, to elaborate on his policy regarding this issue. The Australian Labour Party has never advocated conscription, either in peace or in war, but there are times when direction is necessary as in the last war.” Labour speakers said that the conscription issue had influenced the New Zealand polls. The Labour Party campaign director (Mr W. Dickson) said 'that the conscription issue had created a serious division of opinion and that this was reflected in the poll. A 'Labour member of the House of Representatives (Mr D. Mulachy) said that the split in the Labour Party in New Zealand over the conscription issue caused the defeat. He added that Mr Menzies had an idea of introducing conscription intd Australia and would put all young men into military camps for various periods of training. This would have a very serious effect on production.’ * Liberal speakers said that the socialist State was .tried out in New Zealand for 14 years under ideal , conditions without success and,. therefore, should' be discarded in Australia.