CHRISTCHURCH NORTH

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 120, 25 May 1925, Page 6

CHRISTCHURCH NORTH

(bi ra,EGiupn.-rnEss association) CHRISTCHUBCH, This Day. n „?: ,1{" Coolte llas beon selected as the cnlieial Labour-candidate for Christchurch North.

WHICH IS IT TO BE?

GLASS DOMINANCE OP NATION-

ALISM

The Welfare League writes :

With the passing of the strong man who Jias held sway for the past twelve years^as Prime Minister, the Right Hon. W. P. Massey, there has come to the surface a very widespread' desire on the part of the people for a realignment of the political party divisions within the country.

It would be a decided error to assume that-what is craved for at. this time is a coalition of Ihe two old historic parties Ooaliljona arc not famous for the qualities of strength and virility. The people are anxious for strong'and vigorous gciyernn'.ent which "ill supply ths re!ji|jaH« tense vl sceuriljf Is jifuvjtU tax

healthy progress, but they have no illusions that this is to be found in mere coalition. What is looked for is a fusion of the best elements in our political life and an infusion of the national spirits of strength and confidence which will supply us with a really new party having a clear mission for constructive work. It is for such new life in our politics the individual citizens are auxiously seeking. For some years past the Welfare .League has seen the change coming about, and as an organisation voiced its opinion of what was wauled. In 1919 we wrote and published these words :— -I lie old Reform and Liberal Parties are no longer divided on any important matter of principle, and their political platforms, if they differ at all, differ omy on mmor details." We protested tlien that "the electors in favour of sane reconstructive legislation were being asked to split their votes, not on matters of principle, but of personal prejudice, instead of combining to combat a movement organised and headed by men ot revolutionary ideas." Again in 1923, we wrote :—"That all the world over the voters have got to lace two policies which have a fundamental difference—it is no less than Constitutional Reconstruction v. Revolutionary bocialism; Individual Liberty v. Socialistic State Control. If we are right, then we must sink all minor diflereiices, and combine in one party to meet the determined attacks on personal liberty. The present selfish party divisions merely assist the revolutionary movement by weakening the constitutional forces.

Last year our report summed up the matter thus :—"The remedy is obvious, and we have stressed this for years, namely, to get back to the two-party system, where the House is divided on fundamental differences rather than personal prejudices. This means, in short, the fusion of the best elements in the House into a National Party with a non-socialistic policy to oppose the Socialist Labour Party which owes its strength largely to "the present selfish divisions which exist amongst their opponents. This would be effected at once if the vast majority of electors had their way."

On this whole subject we come back to the ground of principles. ■ Whatever parties have been in the past the natural lines of division to-day are between the forces that stand for national unity and constructive progress, in harmony with the Empire to which we. belong; and the elements which rest upon a basis of class consciousness and socialism supplemented by a vapid sentimental internationalism.

_ The line of division is class versus nation. A National parly would rally to its standard Liberal, Reform and constructive Labour, which are truly such in principle. Conference between parties which is to be no more than bargaining for position, and huckstering of portfolios, is worse than useless. To settle on j strong leader and leave him free, to select solely on the basis' of capacity for National service is, we •'rfVC) rather what tl)e People desire. The slogan of "a National progressive party is not an idle cry as far as the electors are concerned. It remains to be seen whether the politicians aro sound enough on principle to meet this situation or whether they will allow personal ambitions and prejudices to perpetuate the useless divisions which stand in the way of a National parly for national safety and welfare.