Evening Post MONDAY, MAY 19, 1941. SIGNIFICANT SWING

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 116, 19 May 1941, Page 6

Evening Post MONDAY, MAY 19, 1941. SIGNIFICANT SWING

Labour taught the people to vote by ticket in local body elections and the people have now, apparently, learned the lesson. Paradoxical as it may seem, the marked, and even surprising, success of the Citizens' ticket in Wellington, is in part a protest against the ticket system. Labour's aim is to bring all government, local as well as national, under the control of the organised party — the Labour caucus, the Trades Hall, the Labour Conferences—to make the party machine the real organ of government, and the constitutional governing bodies merely the means of registering party decisions. People cannot have been blind to certain incidents pointing to; this—such as the fact that the ex-Governor of the Reserve Bank spoke to the Labour caucus and other members of Parliament and the people were never told what he said. The local body election results indicate that some of the people, at any rate, are aware of the extent to which they are excluded from the business of government and are making their protest by going the whole way in voting the Citizens' ticket. This is really not changing one party for another, for the primary purpose of Citizens tickets is to prevent domination by the Labour ticket—not to lay down a hard-and-fast policy. In Wellington the result is shown in an undeniable setback to Labour. Against a candidate of ability and long civic service, Mr. Hislop obtained a record majority and Labour councillors of long standing have lost their seats. The setback seems to be more sweeping than in other centres. Perhaps the predominance of trade union officials drew more marked attention to the way control was drifting to the party organisation, and the "protest" by some officials to Mr. Nathan who directed notice to this fact underlined the effect of such drift. In other towns, however, there is a similar, if less marked, movement. Auckland, Christchurch, Dunedin, and other towns where Labour either held a strong position or was working towards control, have swung the other way. Though the national significance of the result should not be overestimated, it cannot be ignored. First, we submit, there is disapproval of partyism at this time. We do not think the people as a whole wanted local government elections. Their attitude during the campaign certainly betokened no enthusiasm. But. having to vote, they voted against the party that in national politics has insisted upon retaining party control except for the limited concession of the War Cabinet and the advisory War Council. Whether this warning sign will cause Labour to reconsider its attitude remains to be seen. Certainly the lesson of the campaign and the result should cause some serious thinking. The campaign had anything but a unifying influence. It emphasised differences, and did nothing to promote real unity on the war issue. A national election campaign would be even mote disturbing and distracting. If this fact is not heeded, then perhaps the possibility of the result following the local election direction—against a party that refuses full union and insists upon an election—may lead to revision of opinion. j