THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1922. BRITISH PARTY CONFUSION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18225, 19 October 1922, Page 6

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1922. BRITISH PARTY CONFUSION.

Several days have passed since the Manchester speech of Mr. Lloyd George, which had been expected to clarify the political issues, to end or to mend the Coalition. Still the confusion remains, growing daily worse, for the Prime Minister, very evidently of set purpose, framed his speech so that it clarified nothing. The consequence is a game of political cross-purposes, with every

faction seemingly waiting for someone else to make a move. There are reports of efforts to keep the Coalition together for an appeal to the country, coupled with stories of the manner in which the Conserva*tives intend to deal its deatli-blow. Nobody, apparently, is definite enough about the imminence of an

election to give put policies or programmes. An unnamed official of the Labour Party is reported as

saying frankly that his organisation will not do so until an election iss assured, for fear of having its thunder stolen. Despite the categoric denunciations of Mr. Lloyd George, his policy and his Manchester

speech, it is a little difficult to determine wherein he has offended worse in the past few weeks than in many months before. So far as many of the heterogeneous political elements are concerned, so far as most of the London press goes, he has evidently long outstayed his welcome. That, however,,is no new development. This particular storm has been gathering for months. It has probably broken at this moment

because certain political rain-makers have agreed that the appropriate time has arrived. No doubt before

making the move they tested the electorates. The results of their tests are not evident, save that there seems general agreement that now is the time for the trial of strength. The manner in which the millions of voters will respond to the appeal remains an interesting subject for speculation.

To the plain man, with a vote to exercise and no particular love for mere party bickerings, the present position must be extraordinarily perplexing. He is told on all sides that the Coalition, which Jae sent triumphantly back in 1918, is an

inglorious failure; Mr. Lloyd George is described sometimes as a kind of buffoon, sometimes as a sinister.

dangerous, and mightily-powerful personality full of evil works. None of this is new, but it is repeated with the recent developments in the Near East as a particular text. To the plain man it must be somewhat confusing to find the Government attacked front, flank and rear, for resisting the demands of the Turks when a few short years ago Turkey occupied a front seat in the gallery of enemies to Britain, the Allies and humanity. Now Mr. Lloyd George is held up to execration because he failed to remain friendly with this former arch-enemy >of mankind. The country is being asked to believe that in the Near East France was supremely right and Britain utterly wrong. Yet there is the awkward salient fact that, when in the face of an aggressive Turk Britain proposed to stand fast, France withdrew her troops. There are so many comparable cases in which France, proposing to stand fast, found British troops standing fast also. It is quite easy to make a case against the Coalition and the Prime Minister. The records of the past three years bristle with happenings to render attacks easy. Yet, because the climax has just been worked up, the Near Eastern question is the vehicle of onslaught. The Coalition may have reached the end of its tenure, Mr. Lloyd George may have done the same, but the opponents of both, in planning their attacks, are using material which may be turned against them with deadly effect. Unless new declarations of policy are speedily forthcoming there is the prospect of.'an appeal being made to a country even worse perplexed than it has been by the twists and turns of Coalition opportunism.

The only policy so far enunciated is advanced tentatively for submission to the coming National Unionist Conference. It has but two items, the maintenance of the Entente with France and a trade programme in

' conformance with the resolutions of the 1917 and 1918 Imperial Conferences. The first item needs no comment save that it involves much and explains little. The second illustrates the manner in which British policy is apt to react throughout the Empire. The most important of the resolutions were passed in 1917, their purport being as follows:—

Having regard to the experience obtained in the present war this Conference records its opinion that the safety of the Empire and the necessary development of its component parts require prompt and attentive consideration, as well as concerted action with regard to the following matters:

(1) The production of an adequate food supply and arrangements for its transport when and where required, under any conditions that may reasonably be anticipated.

(2) The control of natural resources available within the Empire, especially those that are of an essential character for necessary national purposes, whether in peace or in war.

(3) The economical utilisation of such natural resources through processes of manufacture carried on within the Empire.

Tho Conference commends to the consideration of the Governments summoned thereto the enactment of such legislation as may assist this purpose.

At the same Conference it was agreed that specially favourable treatment and facilities ought to be given to the produce and manufactures of the Empire. In 1018 the need for reviewing Empire shipping facilities was affirmed, while the desirability of organising and directing migration within the Empire recognised. If these principles are made the basis of an appeal to the people there will be some benefit resulting. From being buried in the recorded proceedings of tho conferences they will be actively and publicly discussed. To be cast into the maelstrom of party strife may seem a perilous experience for them, but it is at least better than to be left in obscurity. It may be they will offer the elector a pleasant alternative to the intricacies of foreign policy, so that out of the confusion fallen on British politics there may emerge a new conception of the homogeneity of the Empire.