Nelson Evening Mail THURSDAY, JULY 31, 1924 BRITISH POLITICS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 31 July 1924, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail THURSDAY, JULY 31, 1924 BRITISH POLITICS

WHILE the fate of the Dawes Report, so ably drawn and so ameliorative, hangs in the balance, there looms up the difficulty which is caused by the bad housing which is so marked a feature of Britain’s cities. The failure of the London Conference would spell the failure of the British Government’s foreign policy; tlio failure to pass the Housing Bill would spell the failure of its home policy. Thus it would seem that. Mr Ramsay MacDonald’s Cabinet is approaching a crisis. Every civilised nation must wish to see the Dawes Report adopted and put into operation, and if the Conference fails to come to a favourable decision, though the British Government, will have lost ground internationally it will have earned the sympathy of all those who wish for the promotion of international goodwill. The Housing Bill, however, is of a highly contentious character. It would confer on the Government. the power to fix the price of building materials, and if manufacturers refused to sell at. those prices, it would give the Government power to take over the manufacturers’ businesses —apparently without compensation—and for the State to conduct them to the end that the housing conditions may bo improved. We do not comment on the provisions of this Bill, except to say that in it is plainly exhibited for the first time the Socialistic character of the Labour Government of Britain. Hitherto the Government has preserved the support of tlie Liberal Party by carefully refraining from proposing legislation of a Socialistic nature, but now, in order to keep its pledge, made to the country at the time of the elections last December, the Government is bound to attempt to solve the housing problem, and its solution consists of the Housing Bill which, if it becomes law, Mr P. Hastings, the Attorney General, would describe it as “the first words of socialism written on the wall.” Bat, the Bill cannot be passed except with the help of the Liberals ,and the Liberals, apart from the fact that socialism is not part, of their creed, are in a state of mind which may he said to be almost resentful towards the Labourites. Both Mr Asquith and Mr Lloyd George are known t.o be. most dissatisfied with the treatment which their Party has received from the Labour Government, which, as one critic puts it, “does not consult the Liberals”—who keep it in power —“shows no gratitude for support, acridly resents criticism or opposition, and sets up candidates regardless of its allies.” These are some of the reasons which recently caused Mr Lloyd George to declare that “the Liberal Party must assert itself. Things cannot go on as at present,.” So that it looks very doubt-

fill if the Housing Bill, il it is put forward in Hie form described by the Atturnoy General, will pass the Commons; and, if defeated, the same, authority declares that the Government- will go to the country.

Mr Stanley Baldwin, Lite leader of the Conservative Party, also seemed to have had a general election in view, when he described, at Manchester, last week, the broad lines of the policy which he proposed to follow. He would seek to gather into the Conservative Party ‘all those who believe in the maintenance of the constitution and liberty, and in giving the whole Empire an assurance that the Mother Country is resolved lo do her duty by the Dominions.” It would be naturally gathered from such words that. Mr

Baldwin is looking for another appeal to the country at an early date. The Labour Party evidently thinks that h inis much to gain by such an appeal. L expects to gain over a hundred scats in the Commons, and to transform its 191 votes into 300. But what of the Liberal Party? Lord Rothermere, the newspaper magnate, is so hold as to declare that, in his opinion,

■‘there is room in Britain for only two political parties, and the Liberal Party will disappear.” One thing seems certain: that, if the Labour Party is going to adopt an actively socialistic policy, it cannot retain tlie support of the Liberals, who, if they are asked to pass judgment- on such a policy, are much more likely to side with the Conservatives than with the Labourites.