NORTHREN DAILY ADVOCATE Registered for transmission through the post as a newspaper. FRIDAY, JUNE 27, 1924. THREE-PARTY POLITICS.

Northern Advocate, 27 June 1924, Page 4

NORTHREN DAILY ADVOCATE Registered for transmission through the post as a newspaper. FRIDAY, JUNE 27, 1924. THREE-PARTY POLITICS.

The cables mentioued this week, apparently quite as a matter of course, that, the British Labour Government had ''sustained another defeat" in the House of ■Commons. A combination of Conservatives nn<i Liberals brought about the defeat, as it is liable to do j at any time, but it is expi-iined that ; the question involved was f-ne of procedure, not of principle, and therefore the reverse made no difference to the Government's position. For the Government to suffer any kind of defeat and still carry on is a new experience in British politics. Until r >centlv, of course, there were only two parties that counted in the House of Commons. , Unionists arid Liberals held office in turn and there was no Serious rival in the field to complicate the issue. The Labour Party was insignificant. The Irhli Nationalists were for practical purposes allied to the Libei als. The party which gained a majority at the polls occupied the Treasury benches, and stayed there until the verdict was reversed at a subsequent election. With the establishment of the coalition during the war the party system virtually disappeared for the time being, and when it revived it was in a new form.. In the ejections of 1918 the independent Liberals . arid Labour mat e a poor showing, and the Coalition was given the rope with which it nfterwards hanged itself. But in 1922. although the Conservatives secured a comfortable majority, it was clear that labour's star was in the ascendant, and that, with the reunion of the divided Liberal party, which was certain to com:; before long, Britain would soon experience the embarrassment and anomalies consequent upon-the existence of three powerful partus. If Mr Balawin had gone to the country on a different issue he might have carried | the day. But his proposals were anathema to a school of political thought wedded to free trade, and in the upshot we have the spectacle, unprecedented in British history, of a G-ovjrnment which can only remain in office by grace of one or other of the parties in opposition. These parties, morr.iver, are in fundamental principle as hostile to Labour as they are to each other. The result of the change that has taken place has been uncertainty and confusion. Mr Ramsay MacDonaJd has play el his cards very dexterously. He has studiously refrained frora introducing cr pressing legislation which would be unpalatable to Conservatives and Liberals alike. We hear little of the capital levy nowadays. He has limited himself to measures upon whi'-'h the opposition parties aro known to differ, and has passed them with the aid now of one, now of the other. Thus the Conservatives believe in the maintenance of the navy at its present strength, and helped the Government to carry its programme of cruiser construction (although in their opinion thi3 did not go nearly far enough), which Mr Asquith denounced as insane folly Conversely, Mr MacD mald knew that he could rely upon Liberal support for the abolition of the McKenna duties. He placated the Liberals in regard to the Poplar surcharges, and when it was evident that Government's proposals, to the effect that the unemployed should be relieved of the obligation of paying rent, would be de.f sated by a combination o' - the other parties, he discreetly allowed them to be talked out. The Budget was quite innocuous, and might easily have emanated from the Liberals or the Conservatives. The bill for the nationalisation of the coal mines was a private one, and its rejection had no significance. Everywhere, indeed, Mr MacDonald has successfully avoided a direct challenge. His position has been improved, not only by his moderation, which, although it may be a virtue enforced, is nevertheless a virtue, but also by his skilful tactics. The Liberals may hint portentously that the time has almost come to evict the Government, but they cannot do this without the assistance of the Conservatives. The latter do not see why they should pull the chestnuts out of the fire for the Liberals. Meanwhile the Government picks its careful way along ;i difficult path. Rut if the

parties arc pur,suing their own ends with more or less success, what of tlic country? So far as the well being of the electorate is concerned the throe-party system, with a numerically weak party in power, is not satisfactory. Party interests count too much, the interests of the country for too little. In our own country, where, of course, the position as between party and party is different, the Government having the largest number of supporters, we can see that party interests are causing much discussion, and there is ever present the danger of the needs of the country being overlooked for the sake of party. Almost all over the British Empire the Parliaments are robbed of some of their efficiency by the effects of three-

party struggles. The old system, which gave us two main parties, certainly seems to have produced better results.