ATTACK ON PARTY SYSTEM

Dominion, Volume 36, Issue 304, 18 September 1943, Page 8

ATTACK ON PARTY SYSTEM

New Plymouth Independent MINORITY RULE SAID TO BE RESULT

Dominion Special Service. NEW PLYMOUTH, September 16. “I haven’t been selected by any party or group for whom I have to be a yesman. I was requested by a number of people to stand for New Plymouth,” said Mr. AlcCready, Independent, at a meeting in AVestown tonight. The speaker said the party system simply resulted in legislation for the particular party ia power for the time being and tended to create sectional antagonisms. It did not represent the people and was not democracy. He said parties were dominated by a caucus or a conference. He could not see why these meetings should be secret, except to conceal any opposition within tho caucus to any proposals made. A majority within the caucus could carry the day and the opposition was not allowed to show itself in Parliament. The oppositionists became party yes-men. Added to the official Opposition, that other opposition which was not allowed to bo vocal really represented a majority of the members of Parliament against' the party proposals, and the true result was minority rule. Air. AlcCready referred to the activities of the two main parties in the field, and (he propaganda in which they indulged, and said a lot: of it. was bluff, expensive bluff, in order to buy the votes of the people to keep the Independents out. “The party system is a system ot tyranny,” said Mr. McCready. It did not. matter'which party was in power. The tyranny was there on the party not in power.' The speaker emphasized the signilieanee of the National Government in Great Britain. In the nation's greatest extremity fear made everyone forget political party differences and the result was a National Government. There was justification for expecting that such a Government could be maintained after the war. lie referred to the present Government’s actions during the war and the amount of governinent done by regulation. They used the war as a smokescreen for the imposition of their socialistic aims,” he said. “If the Labour Party goes back into power, you'll have a greater measure of dictatorship than ever,” he added, “and if the Nationals get, into power God knows what will happen.” Mr. AlcCready said he agreed with a lot in the National Party's’ policy manifesto. The point about it was that it was ah promises. He said no party that got into power on promises had ever been able to carry out the promises. The Laboiti Government got in on a lot of promises in 1935, but had not fulfilled many ol' the promises. Would Malte No Promises.

Mr. McCready said he made uo promise except that lie would support what he believed was right and oppose that which he knew was wrong. He advocated, a number of political reforms, one of which was a reduction in the number of mem; hers of Parliament and the abolition ol the Legislative Council, which he said was today being filled up with trade union secretaries. The country’s war effort had been, retarded through party strife and bickerings and attempts to form a national government had failed. The Government took the credit for the country’s war effort as though they had done everything themselves, but it was the people’s effort. They almost look credit for what the lighting forces had done. "They didn't do that in the last war” he said. Dealing briefly with Ihe public service, Mr" McCready said Ibe employees of |he State were Stale slaves rather than State servants. If the same people bad been doing the same work under private enterprise the Labour Government would have seen that they got. a bet ter deal than they get as employees of the State. He criticized the principle. or want, of principle, of appointing men to Cabinet positions who were not responsible to an electorate. He said be was not speaking against, those men personally, but thought it said little lor the mental capacity of the Labour Party in Parliament if three men could not be found among them to fill the positions.

“1 was told that Miramar was a Labour stronghold mid that if I, criticized the Labour Government 1 would be tom to bits.” said Mr. E. (.!. Bussell (Independent. Wellington East) al the close of his meeting at Miramar on Thursday. "Well. I have criticized in no uncertain manner, but the reception yon have given me is easily Ibe most friendly so far received by me.”