Evening Post. TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 1929. LABOUR'S VAGUE TRUMPET CALL

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 58, 12 March 1929, Page 10

Evening Post. TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 1929. LABOUR'S VAGUE TRUMPET CALL

Notwithstanding recent speculations as to his health, Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald is leading Labour in the preparations for the General Election campaign. His statement reported yesterday suggests that he desires to make Labour's policy definite and constructive. He relies in a measure upon the public being tired of the Baldwin Party, but he is not so foolish as to expect this to carry his own forces to victory. A negative policy is .always easy to lay down, especially in a time of difficulty. The most superficial politician can wax eloquent on the failings of a Government, but it is more difficult to follow up destructive criticism with a constructive argument. Yet elections have been determined by destructive criticism alone. The ejectors have been in the mood of Huckleberry Finn when he expressed a desire to be in hell. "All I wfcnted was a change. All I wanted was to go somewheres. I waren't particular." It is not to be thought, however, that public discontent has reached the stage in Great Britain when the Baldwin Ministry can be routed by any party offering a change. The electors have, within their own memory, tried the alternatives, and they are likely to take the precaution of inquiring. the location of the "somewheres" where they are invited to go. •

Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald knows this, and 4ie says that the country expects three things from Labour:—

(1) A scientific handling of unemployment.

(2) Sound finance to assist industry. (3) A new diplomacy which would consider the whole European situation aud relievo Britain of its subordination to France.

It would have been more illuminating if the Labour Leader had proceeded to explain in detail how he proposes to meet the expectations of the country. In foreign policy the country, remembering Mr. Mac Donald's good work in 1924 and forgetting his surr render to the Left Wing, may be inclined to take him on trust. The, achievements of the London Conference and the Herriot conversations will always stand to his credit. In Egyptian affairs, also, he showed that a Labour Foreign Minister could be firm and insistent. But against this good must be set the surrender to the Left Wing which appeared in his Russian negotiations. Recollection of this failure will prompt the country to ask more particularly how Britain is to be relieved of subordination to France and how the new diplomacy will consider the whole European situation. The Foreign "Minister who brought about a new understanding with France should not find his diplomatic capacity unequal to the task of correcting the alignment of Anglo-French policy; but the implications of the proposal to "consider the whole European situation" are so varied that a more exact explanation is called for.

It is, however, upon domestic more than foreign affairs that the issue of the General Election will depend, and here Mr. Mac Donald is most vague^ "A scientific handling of unemployment and sound finance to assist industry" are generalities to which any party could subscribe. The Baldwin Government has been compelled by its responsibilities to leave generalities and deal with practical problems. It has pinned its faith to de-rating and safeguarding and upon these measures it will stand or fall—if it can make them the issue. There is much virtue in that "if," for both safeguarding and de-rating are complicated questions, not readily understood. The voters, and particularly the new "flapper" voters, may be led to accept instead the patent medicine which Mr. Lloyd George has evidently prepared, or Labour may have something even more attractive to the eye. Labour's policy, it seems, will depend upon who has the^ear of the party. If it is Mr. Snowden, safeguarding and de-rating will be attacked on the high economic plane—as high above the heads of the average elector as the intricate details of the measures are. If, on the other hand, Mr. Wheatley's voice is heard, there may be a revival of the "Socialism in our time" slogan.

"The scientific handling of unemployment" is particularly a phrase which offers a wide field for speculation. The nine months' Labour Ministry cannot be said to have made a beginning with such science. It increased the weekly rates of unemployment benefit, but it did not institute any system which could be classed as "scientific" or even new. It escaped censure for failure to deal with unemployment only after Mr. Asquith gave a reprieve by stating that the Government should be given more time to turn round in. The present mind of Labour on this issue is not easy to read. While the

political leaders are critical of safeguarding, certain of the unions are disposed to join hands with the employers in claiming whatever relief that policy may afford. To entice them away, Labour must offer something more attractive. What can it be? And what i 9 the sound finance to assist industry? De-rating offers relief to agriculture and the heavy industries. It is deferred relief, hut Mr. Snowden's Budget did not give even this. In the opinion of "The Times," it "depleted the national Exchequer and did little if anything to reduce the heavy burden of taxation on industry." It was a consumers' Budget rather than a relief measure for industry, and one can but marvel at the change if Labour can now be persuaded to set its seal on a policy which will call for less taxes from industry. Labour has indicated no possible economies except in the Defence services, and these have already been cut very close to the bone.