THE LIBERAL POLICY.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 2 November 1922, Page 4

THE LIBERAL POLICY.

(To the Editor.) Sij—-For some months now the Liberal Party has been freely criticised jin practically, every newspaper in the ' Dominion. , Your own journal, Mr. Editor, has contained its fair share of this criticism. However, despite the growing volume of adverse comment on what has been declared a dying party, there have been many who were prepared to suspend judgment until the party leader had outlined his policy. This applied especially to those who, ! like myself ■, have not been in this country long enough to vote at previous elections. However, as one who has j always^taken a keen interest in politics I.cannot help expressing my very real disappointment at the emptiness of tne ]- policy speech of what I had been led ' to believe, was a Radical party. For ' absolute poverty of principle the Liberal Leader's policy speech would be hard to beat. Amid the array of /threadbare political principles it is impossible to detect one plank which: would entitle the party to pose as a Radical force. After all, a policy is not made "Radical merely by introducing such words as "drastic, '~ ■■ "vigorous," etc., into every half-dozen' lines. Commencing with an affirmation of Liberal jingoism and loyalty to that meaningless phrase * 'constitutional methads," the manifesto ends with a reference to "humanitarian legislation such as has always marked the great traditions of the party. " Between is set forth a line array of platitudes,; but where is the Radical policy? Mr. Wilford sets out to attain such mutually exclusive ends as: (1) The setting up of Whitley Councils and the niaintenance of the present arbitration sys-r tern; (2) the enactment of proportional representation and the retention of the country quota. But, apart from a few features such as these the policy contains nothing of importance that is not 'adequately covered by Mr. Massey*s manifesto, which has the added advantage of being obviously moulded by more practical considerations than Mr. Wilford's nebulous proposals. The , Dominion, I note, refers to the "Re- | ported Discovery of 14 Liberal Planks. To me seems rather ominous that Mr. Wilford, in introducing himself as the prophet of a new era in our political -life, should thus enunciate his programme in "fourteen points." History has one example of a great reformer who, with his "fourteen points," was first hailed by the world as the saviour of mankind, and later accepted by it as a tragic failure. That the failure of the prophet of Petone will be no less dismal is evident from the fact that his fourteen points are equally impracticable, and, in addition, totally unacceptable to those who are looking i for cnanges of a fundamental character. A party which in its programme contains no suggestion of radical changesm the social and economic organisation ' of society, which, indeed, fails to recognise these as the real problems of to-day, a party which approaches the electors at a time like the present with ' no reference to those larger problems of international relationship which, in spite of our failure to recognise them yet, exercise a determining influence on the whole of our national existence, such a party is no radical party, but a reactionary party in every sense of the term. If the Liberal-Labour Party has nothing further to offer the people of this country than is contained in the manifesto of its leader, it will, as a natural result, come to be treated with contempt by those who recognise: the rteal opposition between Labour and Reform as the only live issue before : the country to-day.—l am. etc i RADICAL. I