A LEADER AND HIS POLICY

Evening Post, Volume CXXXVI, Issue 73, 23 September 1943, Page 6

A LEADER AND HIS POLICY

The favourable impression which the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Holland) has made on the people of New Zealand during his highly successful election tour was strengthened by the vigour and ability with which he dealt with political issues in his address in Wellington last night. Although his experience in the field of national politics has been comparatively short, Mr. Holland has, in the face of many difficulties, succeeded in welding the National Party into a strong fighting force, which today is able to offer to the electors, not only a sound and progressive policy, but a group of candidates well qualified to put it successfully into operation. One of the outstanding features of Mr. Holland's leadership has been the loyalty he has received from those associated with him without the necessity of exacting ironclad pledges of support on each and every issue which is likely to come before Parliament. Under our system of Parliamentary government the formation of groups to decide on a concerted line of action and to put that line of action into operation when the opportunity occurs is inevitable, but that should not mean that those comprising the groups should be content to fill the role of "yes-men," voting always at their party's call and sacrificing claims to independent thinking and independent action. / The National Party has never insisted on such blind obedience. In fact, one of the great needs of the party in recent years has been a greater measure of cohesion to counter more effectively the iron discipline which has always characterised the Labour Party. Having achieved that cohesion by his personality and his breadth of outlook, Mr. Holland has offered to the members of his party a degree of freedom, except on a straight-out question of confidence, that augurs well for the future of politics in New Zealand.

The freedom which members of the National Party will enjoy, while remaining loyal to basic principles, contrasts sharply with the absolute obedience which the Labour Party demands of its members when issues are being debated in public. Labour's long battle for office probably convinced it of the necessity for solidarity in all things, and its desire to present always a united front to its opponents and to the public has undoubtedly followed it on to the Treasury benches. It has been a disturbing feature of the present Government's regime that decisions on major questions of policy have been made behind the closed doors of the Easter Conference of the party or by secret sessions of the Parliamentary caucus. Once these decisions have been made, the rigid discipline exercised by the party over its members has prevented any opposition being expressed in public. This has made the proceedings of Parliament little more than a formality. Parliament, by the use of the majority which Labour has enjoyed, has become the rubber stamp for decisions of conference and caucus instead of a deliberating Chamber charged with the duty of weighing in public the pros and cons of legislation submitted by the Executive. The dangers of such a procedure are obvious. In the event of member's of the Government caucus being almost evenly divided on an issue, it may even mean that legislation opposed by a majority of the House, made up of dissenting members of the Government caucus and the Opposition, might find its way on to the Statute Book. Such a possibility makes a larce of Parliamentary government. There is also a danger, when decisions are made in secret and later supported by an obedient majority, of the suspicion, if not the fact, of domination, by extraParliamentary bodies. Mr. Holland's undertaking to confer on his followers the right to exercise their own judgment gives promise of a welcome return to the days when Parliament, and Parliament alone, made decisions affecting the interests of the people as a whole. It is, moreover, in line with the general aim of the National Party to return to the people the freedom from Government dictation they once enjoyed. The policy which Mr. Holland has been explaining during his tour, and which he delivered so forcefully last night, is neither negative nor obstructive; it is positive and progressive. It represents a sincere attempt to solve the present and future problems of the country in a manner that will place less emphasis on the power of the State and more on the right of individuals to work out their own destiny, not dominated but guided and assisted by the machinery which the State can and must create.. Where the State can usefully intervene, the, machinery will be provided; where the individual is best fitted to manage his affairs, the State will refrain from interference. In short, the bureaucrats will be checked decisively in the use of the powers they have exercised for so long, and with ever-growing thoroughness, to the detriment of the individual and of the country. We believe that the determination expressed by Mr. Holland and his colleagues to rid New Zealand of the stifling effects of bureaucratic control has made a wider appeal than any other features, admirable as many of them are, of the National Party's platform, and . has provided the electors with a real and vital issue. Mr. Holland has stated the case of his party with force and reason, and has shown himself to be well fitted in every way to lead the country during the difficult war period that still lies ahead and during the perplexing period of reconstruction after the war. He has shown that he has a grip of the problems that face the country and the will and determination to meet them courageously, assisted by a party which is actuated by one motive—the future welfare of New Zealand.