BRITISH LABOUR PROSPECTS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 247, 18 October 1922, Page 4

BRITISH LABOUR PROSPECTS.

It ran hardly be doubted that Mr. -Austen Cliaiiiberlain'* recent speecb on tin; political situation was delivered with the full knowledge and consent of I'is colleagues, and in that case it is evident tliat, as the Uliairman of th»s i'arliatary Labour party has already remarked, tiie battle cry of the Coalition at the forthcoming election is to be "a wicked l.a'bour Government." \V<- need not attempt to reconcile this view of Labour anil its aims with the democratic convictions nnre professPd, and no duitbt sincerely held, by Mr. Uovd George. As now voiistituted. tUt Coalition fiovernnient i e a iiighly compoeite body with, in the main, strong ( 1111- ,- ---di-nciea: and Mr. Lloyd (ii'.orge already find- his past legislative record almost entirely obscured by the anti-di'mocraiie ptTurts <>f "the most reactionary Governtnent of modern times." In one senise this unvi-Laiiour cry it, &a a pioce of liolitical propaganda, so obvious Iliat it uill not bi> La.ken »erioual,y by the grout majority of the electors. Conservatives mid reactionaries have always striveu to strengthen themeelves against '.he encroachments of democracy tiy sligmatisinfr their opponents with some opprobrious titk l , and predicting untold dieatters as the inevitable fate of tiie country if it should entrust its destinies to democratic hands. Mr. Chamberlain in England and Nsr. Massey in New Zealand represent much the same tendencies and political methods; and just as Mr. Massey attempts to discredit all hia opponents by branding them as proUolslievik, so Mr. Chamberlain trice to discount the opposition to Unionism by labelling it "dangerous," and appealing to the country to vote for Unionism as the only means of saving itself from an irreparable catastrophe. But we may well <loiil>t if, in this instance, Mr. Chaniberlain has not committed a serioue tactical blunder. For in the first place we can be curtain that his declaration will intensify the. hostility of Labour toward the Coalitionists;' indeed, Mr. Thomas has already replied that Labour accepts the challenge, and will throw its whole weight into the balance, against t\m Coalition. But in view of the known moderation and the well-tried ability of the most responsible and mithoritntivp members of the Labour purty, Mr. Chamberlain's diatribe has iv» little connection with facts to make any serious impression on public opinion. The "Times,'' conservative though its sympathies are, has declared that Mr. Chamberlain's speech was "an unwise, unfair, and misleading attempt to conjure up the Labour party as a terrible menace."

As we ha\"e already reminded our readers, the responsible heads of the Labour movement are well-tried men of moderate views, who have frequently and consistently repudiated all sympathy for violent revolutionary methods. Several of Labour's best known leaders held Ministerial rank during the war and it is worth recalling that the "Morning Post," the most reactionary of all British new-papers, once declared that, in view of Mr. J. R. Clyiies' splendid administrative record, the country need- have no apprehensions about its destiny if it were committed to the control of a Ciovernment composed of men of his type and character. Moreover the Labour party, if it were faced with the responsibilities o f office, would not neod to depend, upon ite own unaided resources. For as the "Manchester Guardian" hw< recently observed, "it is well known that the Labour party now commands the support of some of the ablest men of the present generation, of men who »ire close students of political and social questions, and who moreover represent, a wide range of experience."' No one can deny that Labour, like every other political party, will iicpH to gain wisdom by experience-, but there is a srreat deal in the contention of a lt»adine LihcT.il organ that ''it i< questionable whether a Labour Oovernment would be more inexperienced than the Liberal Government, when it came into nffiVe in lftOfi." Even in thn dangerous field of foreign policy. T.abour would tnon realise its and =hape it- course accordingly, and the other parties have not made such a eiiScesfi of their foreign policy that they <-nn afford to deride Labour on this score.