LABOUR IN N.S.W.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18551, 28 November 1925, Page 17

LABOUR IN N.S.W.

THE PARTY AND THE REDS. FIGHT FOR CONTROL. A FEW THINGS TO REMEMBER. \sncuL to '"act ?*«».") j (By KV.W.) The cable news told us. tho other day, of a split in tie Labour. Party in New South Wales. It. is important that too muck shall nob be exnectod of such a split,. It must not bo assumed, for ipstanoe, that there is at all likely to be a general revolt on the part of some strong and sensible moderate group within the Labour Tarty acainst the destructive policy aud prac£eo of the Communist group. The first and most important plank in the platform of tho Australian Labour Party, as it is of the New Zealand Labour Party, is "the socialisation of the means of production, distribution, and exchange." That plank was adopted a few years ago, and not without thought, or without some attention beinc called to the real meaning" of lit* proposal. It was strenuously opposed "by Mr Theodore, then Premier of Queensland. It was well understood frhen, that this was the Communist objective, and those who understand it at all understand no loss well to-day i hat it is still the Cominunist objective. But no Labour leader in Australia would daro to suggest that the objective should be abandoned or modified. In the face of these facto it is obviously preposterous for Mr Lang or Mr Holland to disavow the Communists. Tho Labour Party is a Oommunist Party, and every man who subscribes to the platform is a Communist. The chief difference between Mr "Jock Garden, the leader of the Communists in New South Wales, and Mr Lang, Mr Matthew Charlton, or (Mr Theodore, is that Mr Garden insists that the objective of tho Labour Party means what ifc says, and the others—well, chiefly. they want a job. Actually not Mr Garden nor Mr Lang nor Mr Theodore know ail about what the Oonununist objective means. No man on earthy could write down half of what it meaxw without writing quite a large book, anc? none of these gentlemen, not even Mr Garden, is capable of writing half of that book.

The A.LJP. and the Bods. When a Labour leader in Australia denies the Communists, be is absolutely sincere about it; they are the troublesome people who may oajuse him to lose his job, and the holding of hia job is one of the things that a Labour leader is very sincere about. But Mr Charlton's repeated disavowal of the Communists in the recent elections did not mean that he disavowed Communism; he could not well deny Communism, because he does not know what it means. "What he meant, and what they all mean when they express their very real dislike of the Communists is that theyv do not approve of the Communists' methods of going about things. This so-called split is nothing more than a fight for control of the .Labour machine. It goes on all the time, although more is heard of it at election limes. The Australian Labour Party, or, as it is always called, the A.L.P., still holds to its resolution that Communists are not eligible for membership, but that resolution does not mean what most intelligent people would understand it to mean. It does not mean that any man -professing Communist doctrines is ineligible for membership; that would be absurd, in the face,'of the declared objective of the Party. AH that it means is that no man who is a member of the very small and ill-organised Communist Party may he at the same time a member of the A.L.P., but thousands of Communist?, who do not Wong to the Communist croup over which Mr Garden roles, and a considerable number of those who do belong to it, are members of the A.L.P.

A Group of N«ar Baft*. The Trades Council in New Soutk Wales is an organisation which exists partly outside of the jurisdiction of the A.L.P. It claims to represent those workers, and those unions of workers who describe themselves as "iadnstrialists." Tho term means nothing. Really it represents chiefly unions of workers, the- leaders of which hare some quarrel with the leaders of the A.L.P. The Council claims thafr it represents all the workers whs are in earnest about "Labour " principles," and no one understands clearly what is meant by Labour principles. Probably an honest description of the Trades Council would be that it represents groups of lower paid workers, who think that the leaders of Labour are more concerned about placating timid Labour voters than in looking after the real workers, and who think that this seeking for votes outside of the ranks of organised Labour, and the moderation of Labour policy in order not to scare such voters, is prejudicial' to organised workers, and especially to those on the basic wage. Such a body is an excellent seed-bed for Communism, and' the Trades Council, while not under the rule of the Communist Partv, js frankly Communistic. But, while it is more Or less openly at war with Messrs Lang, Willis, Carey, and Co., the leaders of the A.L.P., the president of the Trades Council is. or was until recently, a director of the Labour newspaper, which is financed entirely by unions, and which is supposed to be the mouthpiece of the A.L.P. Real Split Impossible. A real split in the Labour Party of Australia along a line of cleavage which would separate Communists from those not Communists would smash the Party utterly, bat there will never be such a split. Just now, smarting under a severe defeat, the Labour bosses aro angry with Walsh and Johnson and Garden, but it is not on record that one of them dared to say a word to discourage the recent strike of British seamen. Walsh. Garden, and Johnson openly supported ! the strike and encouraged tJ>e strikers, the others supported it by saying nothing; the State Government of New South Wales did (jo so far as to refuse to lend the aid of the State police force to apprehend two men against whom a very serious charge was laid by the Federal Government. The main difference between the Communists ' and the A.L.P. is tliat the Communi hie arc a little more honest. Among their leaders are the more advanced Labour men, and they claim that their movement is the spearhead of the Labour Party. They are probably right in this claim. A real split between Labour and Communists in Australia is impossible. Just as it is neccessary to a proper understanding of the situation to know the real relationship between the A.L.P. and Communism, so also it is necessary to know the Australian Oomniunistc. In Russia, the Communist Party, with a membership of about half a million, rules a nation of many millions. 'Many of those millions are also Communists, no doubt, but they are not enthusiastic enough, perhaps not wise enough, not unscrupulous, not cruel enough, to be entrusted with any real share in the tynmany which, is the government of