THE MATAMATA RECORD (Published Monday and Thursday) MONDAY, JUNE 29, 1936. OTHER PAPERS OPINIONS.

Matamata Record, Volume XIX, Issue 1743, 29 June 1936, Page 4

THE MATAMATA RECORD (Published Monday and Thursday) MONDAY, JUNE 29, 1936. OTHER PAPERS OPINIONS.

“ABSOLUTE POLITICAL. FREEDOM ” The intention of the Government to give absolute political freedom to labour unions and the Civil Service is declared emphatically by the Prime Minister. With the ideal as an ideal we are wholly in sympathy, but in giving it practical expression some qualification is necessary. The Prime Minister says that obstacles in the way of unions who may wish to spend their funds in supporting a political party will be removed. It is the objective of the Government to give absolute freedom in this direction. But, as we have pointed out before, “ absolute freedom for the union is inconsistent with absolute freedom for the individual while the individual is denied the right to refrain from joining a union or is compelled to accept a particular form of organisation. Compulsory unionism for industrial purposes is one thing, but when it entails subjection of a minority to the majority for political contributions a distinctly different issue is raised.” There is a Qualification also which should be added to -the grant of absolute freedom to the Civil Service. Hitherto there has not been complete legal freedom, but in: practice' great discretion Has : been used in the application, of restrictions. There' is‘reason behind this. We see it in the results. A United Government could succeed a Reform Government, and a Labour' Government could succeed a Coalition, and it was not found necessary to make, any changes in the Civil Service personnel. The Labour Government began to put its policy into operation with the assistance of a Civil Service which had loyally carried out the radically different policy of the Coalition. Would this have been possible if members of the Public Service had been openly .taking sides ? We do not think it would have been. Complete legal freedom will mean that the prevention of political partisanship in the Public Service will rest upon the discretion of the Service. The record of the past shows that the discretion of the great majority may be relied upon; but is there not the possibility of a few introducing a disturbing influence? We think that there is, and that the Government should retain in its regulations power to distinguish between reasonable exercise of individual rights and action which may be subversive of the non-party character of the Service. The Government, of whatever party it may be, has the right to call for loyalty in service; but it cannot demand more. The removal of all qualifications now attaching to the exercise of political freedom by servants of the State may lead to more or less than, the State has the right to expect.— Evening Post.