Manawatu Herald TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1919. TWEEDLEDEE AND TWEEDLEDUM.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 2044, 21 October 1919, Page 2

Manawatu Herald TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1919. TWEEDLEDEE AND TWEEDLEDUM.

THE ClirHchureh Press says the electors who read the reports of the speeches which were delivered in the course of the financial Debate will be puzzled to know what it is that constitutes the line of demarcation between the Deform and Liberal parties. It was difficult enough before the war to distinguish any such line. There were members of the Deform Pyrty whose views were more advanced than those of a number of members of the Liberal Party who were more conservative in their opinion than some of the members of the Deform Parly were. The differences between the two parlies seemed really to have resolved themselves into differences between those who were in power and those who sought power. They wore the differences between the “Ins” and the “Outs.” ' ll; polities is to be regarded merely as a pastime the existence of differences of this kind, which are not differences in principle, may possibly be tolerated. But politics has become a serious business. The cost of living is 'burdensome, taxation is heavy and, incidence of it is in need of revision, and. the country has problems of a momentous character before it which must be attacked with energy and settled within the next few years. The "Parliament which is shortly to be elected will be saddled with grave responsibilities. It will bo lamentable if its time, which should be devoted to work, is to be frittered away in wrangling over fictitious issues. That is, however, a prospect which is definitely held out before the public if the party con-, diet of the past is to lie renewed. The electors themselves, wc are satisfied, are in no mood to be dragged into opposite political camps if there is no question of principle to justify the reversion to the pre-war party conditions. , ' . # & # $ SEVERAL other journals, including the Wellington Post, express similar views, others again create great gaps between the “ins” and the “puts.” The Southland News, commenting on the policy of Mr .Massey, says: If Mr Massey is really in earnest he could make most of the reforms he outlines as his election programme law in the next few weeks, and he Would Live a record to support his cause instead of air-' other long string of promises. The delay has been too great for the

country to be- satisfied with, attractive window displays of policy. Every moment should Taring action instead of a whole session being devoted to party advertisement. Most of the proposals announced by Mr Massey may mean anything or'nothing. As usual, the Prime Minister seeks safety in generalisation, and there is r not a convincing note from one end of the manifesto to the other. His customary political play has been to tickle the ears of the •groundlings, and in his last effusion he lias done this to some purpose. .There is, however, nothing more inspiring in this summarisation of the Reform policy than in the enumeration of a list of household effects for public auction. Obviously there is not to be a raid on the estates owned by Mr Massey’s chief supporters. One would imagine that there was no such thing as a land question in New Zealand, arid that incidental references to the freehold and .reaggregation would ensure that settlement and increased produc- . * . lion everyone knows and admits — to be-imperative. The pronunciainenito does not come from the heart. It has been laboriously constructed by a set of skilful lawyers, and is devoid of all spontaneity. It will not be taken .seriously, and no one could have expected it would be. There is enough in it to (ill a small book, but there is so little in it that no single idea will stimulate the public imagination. Mr Massey could bring in a Land Bill 10-mor-row that would earn him the gratitude of a whole nation,' hut his courage ebbs at the mere thought of emincialing a policy except by the safe method of innuendo, with a liberal number of loopholes for escape.