THE COUNTRY QUOTA.

Evening Star, Issue 25224, 11 July 1944, Page 4

THE COUNTRY QUOTA.

Drowning men, it is said, clutch ab straws. Men on a cliff face may do the 6ame. The instinct has been illustrated by certain members of the Labour Party who in the last General Election felt it slipping, and had their concern increased 'by the falls it incurred iu most of the cities—and not only in those—in the local foody elections. They are experiences to ponder upon, and a wise conclusion would be that the Labour Party would do better to draw in its invasive limbs and he less given to clambering over everybody in its passion for place and power. But that is the last moral which will he absorbed by some members of a party that, nob contented with political power, has sought- recently to get exclusive control of almost every kind of local body throughout the country, and been repulsed accordingly. The idea seems to have, grown instead, in somo quarters, that the party can improve its prospects by being more aggressive and more inconsiderate. To an increasing extent Labour has lost the support of the fanner—-for sufficient reasons, the latter will say—so let the fanner look to it. . When the Local Elections and Polls Bill was under consideration in tho House last March Mr Chapman, member for Wellington North, said he hoped it would be the forerunner of other con* tentious legislation.' The Bill under discussion was mild compared with whatwould come down in future. The statement was interpreted to mean that Labour would abolish the country quota,Mr Holland has' said frequently that that was in the mind of, Labour. Last week-end- Mr Coinlbs, member for Wellington Suiburbs,' took up the tale. It was the Laibbur Party's intention, ho declared, to abolish the country quota and to fight the/National Party by dissolving the War Cabinet and taking over complete control of the;War effort. The Acting. Prime Minister (Hon. D, G. Sullivan)' has replied that this was an individual view.' The two subjects have never been discussed % either tho Government Cabinet or the War. Cabinet. Individual opinions were expressed on the-m'by a "very limited number " of speakers, without binding anyone else, in a wide-ranging caucus discussion, and why should not any member of a party make public his individual view? Mr Combs apparently erred, therefore, or spoke in advance of any corporate decision, when he put forward his statement as. the Lahour Party's " intention,"

I That would be careless of him, because discipline can be strict within the Labour Party just as regimentation is apt to be drastic in its dealings with .others. Abolition of the countnv quota would be certainly an injustice. With the process of motor restrictions—-and no one knows how long those may bo required to continue—the disability for which it was first applied—the difficulty of many country electors, whose homes ore remote, in getting' to polling places —■may be said to Ijave returned in thesa days. In the country's economy a unique place is occupied by the farmer, and Mr Sullivan's recent tribute to tho wheatgrowers might *be .remembered. Only by the increased effort; on their part during the war years, he declared, had a. serious flour ahortago been averted. To abolish the quota would make many country electorates, already too large, of quite unmanageable- size.; with a minimum of that community of interest which is a democratic essential in voting entities. There is the. pros* pect, also, that, Labour might suffer most from the extension of their boundaries into adjoining constituencies., Mr Comibs, and 'some others at least with him, would appear not only to have spoken too soon, but to have thought too soon for Labour's real interests.