LIBERAL AND LABOUR.

Grey River Argus, 29 March 1926, Page 8

LIBERAL AND LABOUR.

THEIR PROSPECTS IN BPITxkIN. I'cecnljy a great Liberal Con vent ion Was held in London to consider-—a,; th'* ’•abies put it—‘‘Mr Lloyd Gf’orge'a land policy.’' 'J’he fact is that the divisions in the Liberal Party arc far mure acute than this innocent looking cable would have us believe. In addition to internal dissensions, there is much discussion lately in the English liberal press concerning the mutual relations of the Liberal and Labour Parties, I NO HOPE OF AN VNDERRTANDTNG I There is, of course, no possibility at | the present moment of any overt understanding between the two parties, or I indeed of any arrangements whatever that could lead to effective co-opera-1 tion, Tor the numbers opposed—in ! private as well as in public—to any arrangement include an important minority of the Liberal Party and a substantial majority of the Labour Party. | Nor is there any probability of those I who are opposed to co-operation changing their views in the early future. The Liberal and Labour Parties are enemies and not allies, and arc likely for a long time to come to remain so. Some people deplore this 'fac-t, others rcpoicc in it; the important thing, however, at the moment is merely to recognise that it is a fact. WEAKNESS OF LIBERALS.

The position is complicated at th present time by the abnormal, not 1

say pathological, weakness of the Liberal Party, consequent upon its internal dissensions. The public scarcely knows who is its real leader in the House of Commons—Nir Lloyd George or Mr R’uicinian—or whether its future policy is to bo the semi-socialistic land reform of the one or the freetrade nihilism of the other. In so far as the party can be regarded as divided into ’two wings it is obviously Mr Lloyd George who is the natural leader uf the Left wing; yet it is tin* Left wing which, on personal grounds, repudiates him most vehemeutly. The result is chaos. In any nase the Labour Party, even if it were inclined to come to terms with the Liberals, would , have nothing to do with cither Mr. ! Riinciman or Nir Lloyd. George, with the former bccau c e . of his general views and with the latter because of his record and his notorious lack of sympathy with trade unionism. The Liberal Party is thus in a vcrv T poor, if not hopeless, position. It is not only very sma.i in numbers, but I unless it can solve its internal difficulties in a satisfactory fashion, is unlikely to do much more than hold its present position at the next general .rlCction, .Its programme is wholly uuI certain and its prestige has almost disj appeared. Ar a result of the accidents of the i 1D24 election, the Liberal electorate is grossly under-represented in the House of Commons. It has -12 members; it ought arithmetically to have 110. (The Labour Party has 150 members, lit ‘‘ought” to have 2000). This underi representation, which is not in itself important, seems to have given rise i to mistaken ideas as to the vitality of * liberalism. The party looks as if it were in a very bad way, and so it is; I certainly it has no visible prospect of ever again winning a majority. But certainly also it is very far indeed from being dead. The voters in the last election were divided roughly in the proportion of 15 Conservative, 11 Labour and.six Liberal; but if the Liberals had put up more candidates, as they probably will at the next election, their proportion of the votes would naturally have been higher. Moreover, the support they obtained in 1921 may probably, in present circumstances be regarded as something like a lo’.vwater mark. To suppose, as some Labour writers scum to do, that an?’ 'substantial proportion uf these three million electors who voted Liberal in 192-1 can be induced to vote Labour al the next election, seems to us the idlest of optimistic dreams. z LABOUR DISSENSIONS. The Labour Party also, of course, suffers from, internal dissensions, but they are not so serious as those of the Liberal Party, and not nearly so damaging to its prestige. It has, at any rate, no. reason to fear that it will lose ground in the constituencies on this account. Its present membership of [.150 is probably also a low-water mark. But what of its future high-wafer

mark? Apart from sonic unforeseen and .unforeseeable national crisis, we cannot tind any substantial reason for supposing that it is likely to increase its membership very much at the next election, or that even at the election after that it has auy prospect of gaining a majority in the House of Commons. It bolds 150 scats very firmly, but for a bare majority it must win 160. more. What reasonable prospect is there of its being able to do that duriu g th.e next d ecad e ? STRENGTH OF LABOUR. The sfrength uf the Labour Party

as it is constituted at present resides mainly in the fact that it is based upon trade unionism, ami thus has behind it ’lie greatest T economic organisation in the country. But that is also its weakness. It is more sure than any

other party of a certain large measure of support founded upon class loyalty: but for the same season it is more severely handicapped than any other

party in its endeavours to win the sup port of that majority of the electorate who are not members cither of an}

trade union or. of ony political party. It has a wonderful record of success through the last 20 years. It can count upon ailways holding anything between tub.and 200 sens in the House of Commons. But c.an it win many more?

Just possibly it can; but grounds for expecting it to do so. do not seem to be very substantial. LACK OF PRESS.

The Labour Party is, of course, tremendously handicapped by luck of press support. The Liberals and Conservutiv.es have daily and weekly news-

papers in almost every county in Great Britain. The Labour Party p a single daily newspaper, whi> b. however valuable, it may be as a. means of stimulating the enthusiasm of the faithful, is more likely—us it is at present conducted—to alienate than to win the support of those uncertain and “ nqn-politic;il” voters upon whom parliamentary majorities depend. [Broadly speaking, it may be said that the Labour Party has no ]>ress, and .how without a press cau it hope in these days to get even that bare mininrr.n el 310 members that a Government needs elected to the House of Commons? In the great imlustrial arias its position is impregnable. But before, it can hope to rule it must win ibe counties of Wales and Scotland and of the Eafet and West of England: and it seems, at present to have no chance Ul all of doing that, uur even to be

making any great effort in that direc tiou. THE FUTURE. ’ The position, therefore, seems to be this: that even if at tuc next election there should be a great anti-Conserva-tive reaction, there is no reasonable prospect of a Labour majority, stii less, of course, of a Liberal majority. Thu Conservatives will, doubtless, lose the exaggerated preponderance which they enjoy in the pre.seut Parliament ! but, failing sonic miracle, they will remain, for very many years to come, the largest,' strongest, and must coherent party in the House. In the next Parliament there will \ ery possibly be a .Liberal-Labour majority; but in view uf tlx* experience uf 1924 it will nut be possible either fur the Liberal Parly to offer the Labour Party its support, ur fur the Labour Party to accept any such offer. The Conservative Party, as ‘‘tertius _au dens,” will remain in office,’exercising full administration if -not legislative authority, ■. A