Grey River Argus WEDNESDAY, November 21, 1928. THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

Grey River Argus, 21 November 1928, Page 4

Grey River Argus WEDNESDAY, November 21, 1928. THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

If it had been predicted three years ago that a majority of something like one hundred and thirty thousand votes would be recorded against Prohibition at last Wednesday’s poll, the prophecy would undoubtedly have been generally discredited, so that it must be admitted there has been in the meantime a definite change of opinion among a not inconsiderable proportion of the public. The question, however, is as to what have been the causes of the appreciable turnover of votes from the one side to the: other. They doubtless are various, one being possibly the fact that the supporters of Continuance have conducted this year by far the most active propaganda. The N.Z. Alliance has not displayed anything like the ■‘punch” it exhibited in the days when it used, to be widely assumed that in the sphere of argument or dialectics the case for Prohibition had a decided advantage over that against a change in the existing order of things. If it be concluded, however, that the slackening of Prohibition propaganda, whether it be due to a lack of financial sinews of war or some other factor, such as a lack of confidence, d»e to the ac tual experience wjth the “dry” law in America, is the real reason why Continuance, has gained a substantial majority of votes, it cannot be denied that a very large section of the people are at best quite apathetic, towards the whole question. This is a very reasonable conclusion. It is really the extreme elements on either side that infuse into the rest of the public a temporary concern in the triennial referenda. It is by the Prohibitionists acknowledged that their agitation has received a very pronounced setback, but they declare their cause , has not been killed, and that it will, sooner or later, recover from its wounds, since, they point out, ardent reformers are never scared off the field by any rebuff, or otherwise many reforms in the past would never have come about. It is admitted, however, that the No-License camp has been given the subject-matter in plenty for some very’ hard thinking, and a pointed indication that the methods that have been employed in New Zealand to make the country “dry” require very radically to be revised. On the other hand, it Is acknowledged that the Trade has been given a further lease of tenure which it could well utilise for the-purpose of instituting such reforms by its own initiative as would tend to remove many of the grounds on which its critics rely to discredit it. It is said that if such things in the liquor traffic as the prohibitionists cite as excesses were eliminated, the result plight be to rend the idea of the “dry law no longer worth fighting for. At the same time, there is undoubtedly* no possibility of conciliating such agitators as those who hold that liquor in any shape or form is itself a thing of evil. By such a process of reasoning, anything at all which might be abused could be in toto condemned. The voting last Wednesday, however much it may suggest that the people are changing their minds on this question, cannot nevertheless be regarded as , a warranty for taking the decision

away from the direct, vote of the public, in view of the fact that up till) now the question has been left to them by referenda to adjudicate over a lengthv period by a vote every three years. On the other hand, the vote does raise the question of whether the referenda are not altogether too frequent. This is certainly the juncture at which to consider the advisability of making the interval between the licensing noils a longer one. The procedure at present is costly and disturbing. An interval of nine years has been suggested, and it might be preferable to consider an interval of six years. Thus one Parliament could decide not to hold a referendum at the end of its term, and the next Parliament, whatever its attitude on the question, would be quit* unlikely to decree a referendum before the next General Election, for the ••eason that neither the Trade nor the N.Z. Alliance would be anxious for a vote independently of the General Election. On the other hand, an enactment for a nine-year interval would be undoubtedly liable to alteration by a succeeding Parliament. The liquor question has a unique prominence in New Zealand through the repetition of the referendum at such comparatively frequent intervals, and it has got to be confessed that, after all. the result has been to bring the question no nearer a final solution. Therefore, a greater space of time, between which the public could review the matter and the Trade could do its utmost to eliminate any objectionable fea tures, woriid possibly help more than anything else towards a more lasting solution. The suggestion is well worthy of the serious consideration of all concerned, and if ;+ is summarily dismissed, the consequences . will possibly bo nowise to the liking of such as refuse to give it due consideration.