THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1935 MR. SAVAGE'S POLICY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22210, 10 September 1935, Page 8

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1935 MR. SAVAGE'S POLICY

Mr. Savage devoted a large part of his speech in the Town Hall last night to destructive criticism of the Government's administration in the difficult years that lie behind. In listening to the Leader of the Opposition many a ono must have wondered by what right lie appears in the role of critic, since neither he nor organised Labour was willing to help tho country in its years of trial. The Labour Party was asked to join in and assist the national effort and declined the offer, preferring to hinder rather than help. Mr. Savage and his colleagues havo been the armchair critics in the economic war. That fact must have rested in the back of many minds as Mr. Savage's audience waited for the tirade to end and for the production of Labour's policy of reconstruction. Unfortunately the Opposition Leader used up so much time in his attack that his statement of policy comprised no more than a recital of aims, with no explanation of how they are to be realised. That is grievously disappointing. Here is a leader who aspires to office and asks for the country's trust and confidence. As an inducement he talks largely of what he will do, but says nothing of ways and means. This is what the electors want to hear. How will Mr. Savage and the Labour Party redeem their promises? Without that explanation, Mr. Savage's twelve policy points are only a dream castle, without form or substance. Any man or woman could assemble such a Utopia in the hazy content of the after-dinner hour but would not expect anyone to believe in its practicability. It is the business of a statesman to produce something more substantial than a fireside policy. He must labour to work it out and show that it can be applied in the ordinary world of every day. So far Mr. Savage has failed to do that, to cease playing with ideals and to wrestle with the facts.

Many of Mr. Savage's ideals are excellent, but he should not suppose that Labour has a monopoly of human aspirations. Most people nowadays have a developed sense of social responsibility and will agree that some items , of his programme are desirable. They would also like to be shown that they are possible. Such schemes, for instance, as universal superannuation pensions at 60, invalid pensions, guaranteed prices and wages, and salaries, the restoration of cuts without any regard to the effect on industries or the demand for labour, and so on. Life would be just one happy (or maybe monotonous) progress if all this could be. We would be cared for in sickness and in health, freely educated from kindergarten to university, given good well-paid jobs until we were 60 (how is everyone to have a good job ?), and then be superannuated in comfortable plenty. Mr. Savage has omitted a State burial service but otherwise everyone seems to fee fully provided for. Who is to make this full provision and how is it to be paid for 1 Mr. Savage does not explain this. Yet everyone who has passed out of childhood knows that anything worth having—or anything at all—has still to be won by labour and effort. Universal largesse cannot be plucked at will off a tinsel Christmas tree labelled "public credit." Before wealth can be distributed, it must be produced. On this whole, vital question of ways and means, on his method of turning fantasy into reality, Mr. Savage is silent. He does not even try to estimate what he would pay the superannuated now, let alone the future. No figures helps to define his idea of "rates of pay enabling all workers to obtain an equitable share of the country's total production." No estimate is attempted of the individual contribution required for national health insurance. There is no basis of fact whatever. If Mr. Savage expects electors to accept such airy economics, he has a low opinion of their common sense. His scheme is so flimsy that everyone can see through it. Unless he can give some detail and add some substance, show how the thing would work, he is asking too much of the credulity of ordinary people. One item of the twelve deserves separate notice, because it is sufficiently explained to be understood, and is quite possible and only too probable if Labour succeeds to office. Every Labour member, in addition to his pay and emoluments as member of Parliament and such other paid positions as he tilready occupies, would receive employment in the public service. To use Mr. Savage's diplomatic phrase, Labour members would be co-opted, but Labour members only.. They are apparently to do all the work at present done by boards and commissions. They would not, of course, havo any special or expert knowledge such as usually qualifies the members of these bodies, but they would have political axes to grind. For after all they would be politicians, and Labour politicians at that, representing only one point of view and quite frankly determined to work for only one class. First, however, as Mr. Savage makes clear, they will work for themselves on all the well-paid and expensive boards and commissions, of which Mr. Savage disapproves. This will certainly mean Labour government with a vengeance, and New Zealand will "muddle through" as never before. It can be imagined, for instance, the service we shall get when, say, Mr. Parry and Mr. Langskme succeed Mr. Sterling ancl Sir James Gunson on the Railways Board, incidentally restoring political control in a great department and drawing a thousand or so each

in salaries. No doubt, also, listeners could expect a change in programmes—but not the sort of change they desire —if the present Broadcasting Board were replaced by seven or eight Labour members, with their passion for soap-box propaganda. So much for one plank, modestly placed last, in Labour's election platform. As for the other schemes, Mr. Savage has still to explain how they can bo worked, what they will cost and who is to pay for them.