Mr Holyoake’s Tour

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28921, 15 June 1959, Page 10

Mr Holyoake’s Tour

The success of the tour made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Holyoake) will be judged better on its results than on the large attendances at his meetings. The real importance of the well-attended meetings is less in the opportunity many persons have taken to see and question the leader of an alternative to the present Government than in the opportunity he has had to meet thousands of New Zealanders and get some idea of what they are thinking. In the unreal, bureaucratic atmosphere of Wellington politicians can get hopelessly out of touch with the real New Zealand. It is well that members of all parties should get out and see for themselves how the country is looking and hear what people are saying. Private members have more chance of doing so, and in any case know the

relative normality of their own constituencies. It is, however, more important for party leaders to take this exercise because of their place in

political life. Curious administrative happenings such as the Tasman Electra deal, the Railways Department’s appropriation of the Cook Strait ferry, the fumbling with electricity policy, the empire-building of the Department of Industries and Commerce, the oil refinery proposal, and the shuffling over the iron and steel industry

must all look rather different from outside the narrow confines of the capital. Mr Holyoake should have learned something about these and other matters as he has gone round New Zealand. He must have refreshed his memory, too, of the character of the average New Zealander and of what he expects from the Government. If events run their normal course, Mr Holyoake will be the next Prime Minister of New Zealand, and such knowledge will be invaluable to him. But in the intervening year or 18 months he should be a more effective Leader of the Opposition. and the country has seldom needed one more. Mr Holyoake has been wisely Chary about making promises, except for the prediction that

texes must come down from their present level. His insist•nce on thia will probably mean early fulfilment through the

force of public opinion on his opponents. No further reduction may be possible when the time comes for him to exert direct rather than indirect influence. An electorate that has so recently had a sad experience of too lavish promises will not think the less of Mr Holyoake’s party because it does not try to ensure its success by bidding for votes. One difference between the parties that he has emphasised is the National Party’s preference for relying on the enterprise of New Zealanders instead of depending on government direction. We hope that the National Party will continue to emphasise another difference—that it does not share Labour’s opinion that votes can be bought. If Mr Holyoake’s tour has shown him that the people’s distrust of Labour is founded more on broken promises than on harsh taxation it will have been successful indeed.