CORRESPONDENCE What Next?

Greymouth Evening Star, 3 December 1946, Page 8

CORRESPONDENCE

What Next?

. [id ias EDirdk.] .. Sir The Labduri ; Party appear to Be iii a bad Wdy. THd election seems td firivf.left ffieirr.ifi 6fflc&; .fet.Shorn tiSSn S.6WI? liffibst'ds if trie aggrriiafg Vbtei fi§a BptesseA ri single iriffem Trif ,grinritel rrilief. is not so Mfftt ris a Qbiiie >6f, GoVeiiiment Would Hlvd even Voters wrio'se party affiriatibfif. again ..made itiririi vote LSB6tir riaVe . Expressed satisfdritibn that the, election has dteWri-lririir stirii. Where, now,-is tiiriir 55-sdater sterim-rpller? If Mr. Seniplri iri photograpried this time, riding a btillddzer, the picture will be without political significance.. At the sarifri time, the. situation is riot.WitiiStit. daiigriri;. arid.it .is time We NriW Zfaiahders took stock of our rioUfiW’: lit the test eteyrift.yerirs We Have beeS WWed .uj> the garden path to the vrity brink Of.;, thri Socialist abyss; Ari ,ati; able . Zealand writdr desdribed it; discussiiig the Indus.triai fifflciehcy.Actj in. 1939, then quite ndw,arid riot yet in operation as it cah be operated, ‘‘the Labour Goverririierit had taltdn full legal authority to Socialise . everything within thri Doiriinidri, and without further reference to Parliament. So fdr as. enabling legislation Was concerried}”_he said, “the objective of the Labour Party .Was thus achieved. All that reniaihed. Wari to await a suitable moment for putting into execution the pbWers taken; The Labour Party had uririd constitutional forms to beritOW on the Minister of. Industries d despotic power over the livelihood of individuals/that the Grand Cham of Tartary might have envied.” I am how wondering if the suitable riibmerit has arrived. Socialism (which is international) uses constitutional'forms only, when it is up against the British Constitution, which has been so framed as to preserve the liberty of the subject. Faced now with.a powerful, united Opposition, With the’almost certain knowledge that the. next general election Will see them out and apprehensive o£ every by-election, will Socialism iri Nriw Zealand now come into the open, avail itself of the despotic powers it took years ago, and begin to rule in earnest, by regulations? How much would the New Zealanders stand, if it comes to the point? If, for instance, the chemist on one side of the street is ordered to amalgamate with the chemist on the other side, “to save two overheads, in furtherance of a Planned Economy,” will he close up shop and comply? His only right of appeal is to the Minister, who has all the power there is.

When a similar situation was once created in England, our forefathers obtained, under pressure, an undertaking from King John: “To none will we sell, to none Will we deny or delay, right or justice.” The next few years are likely to be difficult in New Zealand’s uneasy Utopia, and we should begin to prepare ourselves. Under any scheme of regimentation the individual belongs to the State, hot the State to the individuals. The British conception is that the State exists in order that the individual may fulfil, his duty, to God and to his fellow men. That is why Socialism is anti-Christian, or it may be truer to say, because Socialism is basically anti-Christian, that is why it dug a pit for us to fall into. _ If we are to survive as a Bntisn democracy and a Christian community, I suggest we must first find out what is wrong in ourselves, and then place our trust where our forefathers placed their trust. Whatever else we turn to wm Jail Greymouth, December 2.

Answer to Correspondent

Firth Street, Cobden. —Either you have misread the article to which you take exception or are incapable of understanding plain statements of fact. The majority of your deductions are unwarranted. Actually, you have expressed yourself as' being in agreement with the only conclusion which, you. have correctly drawn.—Editor, Evening Star.