LABOUR PARTY'S OBJECTIVE

Ellesmere Guardian, Volume XLVI, Issue 3271, 13 November 1928, Page 9

LABOUR PARTY'S OBJECTIVE

(To the Editor)

Sir, —Mr Morgan Williams, who is carrying the flag for Labour in Mid-Canterbury, is quite moderate in his \yiews as expressed at his meetings, but the electors should realise that it is not Mr Williams's personal opinions which will influence his Party in Parliament; he and all . other of that Party's candidates are pledged to "uphold and wholeheartedly work for the objective and platform of the Party and no other."

We have read several of his speeches and can find no mention by Mr Williams of the "objective and platform" which he has pledged himself to support, therefore, for the benefit of your readers we quote some of the items of policy which Mr Williams's party intend to put into operation.

State-owned Shipping Service. —In this connexion we advise electors to consider the huge losses of the Labour policy of State shipping in Australia which has been abandoned.

"Public ownership of land is the

only ultimate remedy for the present I chaos and muddle,'' also '' State-own-ed farms to produce foodstuffs of the people" and again "That privately owned land shall not be sold or transferred except to the State." (1925 platform). We ask the fanners of Mid-Canter-bury how these planks would sun them? If their land is not nationalised they are to be allowed to work it under the severe competition with the State-owned farms. Here we ask Mr Williams to look to Queensland, where the losses on State farms have been enormous. "Public ownership of national ultili-

tics and control of the food supplies of the people. Where natural ownership of an industry is effected all labour for such industry and at least half the board of control shall be appointed by the Unions affected." Does Mr Williams stand for the complete elimination of private enterprise and the management of our railways, etc., by the Union, who shall have power to fix their own wages, etc. ? "Repeal of the Defence Act."—ls Mr Williams prepared to disband our defence force and have no preparation for attack? Finally, we quote the Party's objective ;'' The socialisation of the

means of production, distribution and exchange,'' in other words the total abolition of private ownership, enterprise and initiative. Now why does not Mr Williams act in accordance with his pledge "to uphold wholeheartedly the objective and platform of his Party and no other instead of putting forward a moderate policy? The answer is that his Party leaders have determined to place a moderate platform before the electors and hide the official platform till afterwards. They are wilfully deceiving the electors and we as believers in private enterprise and ownership and as strong opponents of Socialism feel bound to warn the

electors of Mid-Canterbury that behind Mr Williams's soft pedalling is a dangerous policy to which he is pledged especially destructive of the rights of property owners.

One more word. We have not space to criticise Mr Williams's reference to Queensland in support of the soundness of Socialist Government, but the most casual examination of the .true facts would convince anyone that if Queensland is a true sample of the results of Labour Socialist Government then no sane man could support their policy. Mr Williams had better keep off Queensland, as his leader, Mr Holland, i has indignantly protested against. any

comparison being made. When Mr Coates, who is a New Zealander, reI f erred to results in Australia of Labour rule, Mr Holland said "Look only to New Zealand." Mr Holland, not being a New Zealander, and coming from Australia, certainly knows more of Queensland than Mr Williams. so he was naturally frightened of. any comparison.—We are, etc. N.Z. WELFARE LEAGUE.