THE POLITICAL DOLDRUMS

Evening Star, Issue 19550, 7 May 1927, Page 13

THE POLITICAL DOLDRUMS

/ QUO VADIMUS ? , A REVIEW OF PARTIES [Written by Simon Muir, for the ‘ Evening Star.’] Now Zealand politics are in the doldrums. Tt-inay be safely assumed that that fact is recognised by tho parliamentarians of all parties themselves. It has- for,long been recognised by the general ‘public, who are filled with something ‘ like despair as they gaze ■upon the rather pathetic hopelessness .and -helplessness that appear, to have fallen upon all parties ■ equally and alike. / Is there no way out of this Saragossa Sea? Country and Parliament are waiting for a lead. The hour is here. We await the mart. ’ THE DEAD HAND. All parties are lying paralysed under the dead baud of the past—except, perhaps, the Socialist Party, which has no great- political part to boast of, which, be it added, is nothing to its discredit. The Reform Party stands inert, immobile, aimless, mumbling about the great , days and glories of the Massey regime, as if a vigorous past could atone for a stagnant present. There is much, talk of the groat days that have gone, but' there is not a hint of action ,to institute equally great days for the present and carry them forward to the future. With its overwhelming majority, the Reform Party is able to carry what programme it chooses. The man in the street declares it has no discernible programme or. policy. It appears to have assimilated the old saying that “sufficient unto tho day is tho evil thereof.’'’ It leads, in spite of its great power, a hand-to-mouth, precarious existence, improvising opportunist measures to meet difficulties as they arise. Quo vadimus? Whither are we going? Ask any intelligent Reformer, and if he is honest ho will probably reply: “Heaven knows—sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” And so they drift and- hope for the best. It is magnificent faith, but desperately poor politics.

MORIBUND LIBERALISM. Liberalism is, if possible, in an even worse case. In a napless moment Mr Wilford, the late Liberal Leader, sacrificed tbo name of “ Liberal,” adopting that of “Nationalist” in order to “dish the Eeformers.” It was a most unfortunate move. For the sake of a petty triumph over,the Reform Party he snatched the name they wished to adopt', and flung away the grand old name of Liberal, which is imperisuably associated with the greatest political developments both in Britain and the dominions. Most'Liberals in the dominion recognise that a blunder was then made. Speaking strictly, ■ there is only one Liberal in the House to-day, Sir Joseph Ward, who was far too shrewd to be led away or astray, and who, besides, probably is" far too proud of the Liberalism'to which he has proved so faithful throughout a lifetime to bo willing to exchange it for any other name. ■

But the Nationalists—formerly Liberals—are as devoid of policy or programme as the Reformers are. There is no vision in 1 either party. If. the Reformer mumbles of Massev, the Nationalist,' going; 'even further back, mumbles of Ballancd and Seddon and Ward; but to neither party has it become apparent that people will not bo content to dwell in the past and chew the end over past achievements. There is work calling to be done, on every hand and in every department of.our national life. When wc ask the Reformer how ho is going to tackle this work ho is dumb, and the Liberal, if asked the same question, is dumber still. .Between them they do not appear' to' have the glimmering of an idea as to what should be done or how it should ho begun and carried forward. Both parties are in the doldrums. THE SOCIALIST PARTY. Tho. Socialist Party cannot certainly he accused of the somnolence or 'coma which has fallen on the older parties, yet If the same question be addressed to it, “ Quo Vaclimus?” it must answer that it does not know. It believes in lighting, one might almost imagine, for fighting’s sake, and it changes- its aim and objective with the most accommodating graciousnoss. It will come away with a brand-new land policy, and when it finds it does not “catch on ” it will change and modify that policy until its own lather would not recognise it. It will speak at one time with the voice and truculence of a Bolshevist and profess the utmost, sympathy with lienin- ■ ism, and when it finds that “ that cock winna focht ” in Now Zealand it will change the tunc promptly and speak in accents of common, vulgar loyalty. It will wax hysterical over the housing shortage, yet, because it has many supporters in the savv-inilling trade, it will urge that an embargo or prohibitive duties should be put on imported timber, though such a course must inevitably mean higher prices and dearer Louses) If asked “Quo Vaclimus?” it will reply with its shibboleth: “The socialisation of all the means of production, distribution, and exchange,” but it does not know how it is going to get there, and its plans for getting there vary from clay to day. POLITICAL RECONSTRUCTION. Perhaps, as being in the most deplorable condition .of all parties, Notionalists have, been '.the first to realise that some effort must be made to raise themselves from the Slough of Respond. There is talk of a vigorous reconstruction of the party,'tf i.irmuhn ing a clear, definite policy and programme to deal with all the pressing qustions of the hour— : and heaven knows there is an urgent need for all parties to follow that course. Tho people are sick of an infinitude of words that lead nowhitber. If there be a renascence of Liberalism it must come from men who. bolding fast to the imperishable traditions of Liberalism, have the. vision and tho courage to apply them to the problems of to day as Bnllance <v d 3e-dr.ii did in the past. It would be well indeed if there was a genera! upheaval in I ailiamont. There arc prouanly Liljeims iu Parliament who ought, to be sitting on the Government benches- -the I<oll. Mr L. M. Isitt and Mr George Witty were typical examples in Inst Parliament,. There are _ certainly Reform members and Socialists who would find more fitting and congenial companionship on the Liberal benches. Wo need a thorough shaking up jf 011 moribund Parliament so.that the dead bones may wake to life again. Without some such upheaval there is little hope for Parliament or us. A POSSIBILITY. If a. strong Liberal leader were to arise the difficulty would lie instantly and automatically s lived. He would tally around him the Liberal elements in the dominion. He might pus-silly-even get tho .upport of some of tbo Socialists, manv cl whom are beginning to realise that it is 11.11 10 the interest of the country or tho party that Socialism in the dominion should bo. captained by an irreconcilable doctrinaire like Mr H. E. Holland. Sensible Socialists and sensible Liberals are--beginning to realise, tbo folly of fighting each other and giving the battle to Reform There ; are so many reforms which they can unite to carry, and all the. while they j fight each other. The'folly of it all.! j New Zealand looks forward to a time when common sense will _ replace this bitter and idiotic internecine strife between those who ought to bo fighting shoulder to shoulder for common objects. Seddon showed bow it could be done. Quo Yadimus? Whither are we going? The man of progressive and patriotic ideals will pray that from all this talk of political reconstruction there