The New Zealand Times. TUESDAY, JULY 19, 1921. THE NEW PARTY

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10956, 19 July 1921, Page 4

The New Zealand Times. TUESDAY, JULY 19, 1921. THE NEW PARTY

A trumpet has sounded. Afar off it is as yet, but no one can say that, if it is like a voice crying in the wilderness, the owners of the voice intend to remain there. Early day and date and place are announced for the sound to be made in the city. Before a week has gone v*Q shall be- able to judge the new party® strength, understand its intentions, and form an idea of its chances. As the country seems to require salvation, the prospect is pleasing to a people grateful beforehand. In tile gloom cast over us by the slump of so many resources, the new party comes forward with beneficent hands outstretched. And, first, of course, we are struck by the personality of the leader who has marshalled this new party to our rescue. We all recognise that leader, Mr Statham, as the man who once made a formidable crusade for the Reform Party and Mr Massey. At the critical moment, when parties were even, Mr Statham sprang to the front and vanquished a democratic candidate whose election would have adversely decided the fate of the Reform Party and Mr Massey. Mr Statham’s victory decided that fate otherwise, and the continued firmness of Mr Massey in the saddle of government showed very practically the reason that- had brought Mr Statliam into the field against the democratic champion. As Mr Massey has gone rather far since that fateful day, one wonders why Mr Statham is now heading a new party to strike him out of tho saddle in which he fixed him so firmly. Naturally, we turn to the skeleton platform published in the name of tho new party. At the twenty-fourth plank wo see “Reform of the Civil Service.” But this was the strongest plank of the Reform

platform in ite Opposition days, and, though that plank has failed, Mr iVia-s- ---■ soy and the Reformers have made their special pledgee good. The presence of that plank in the platform of the new party rather deepens the mystery. One cannot help wondering u'liy Mr Statham, who made the Party success possible, and the new' party have lost confidence in Mr Massey. Perhaps the refit of the “new” programme may help us. The points are clear as they stand in their shining list—elective executive. Upper House reform, State ownership, State Bank, free education, with free standardised books and free lunches (cheap), general superannuation scheme, State aid to industry, a comprehensive scheme of land settlement, a State medical service, State nurses, free maternity homes, a comprehensive housing scheme for workers. It is a long list of fourteen—-President Wilson’s fourteen pointe suggest themselves rather pointedly—all substantial, and clearly, if insufficiently, outlined. The first thing to strike one about them is that they all hear the brand of the Labour Party. In fact, they were in that party’s procession ot worthy things political but two days ago—to say nothing of the long hut scarcely dazzling career they enjoyed before that epoch-making event. Why, one wonders, does not the new party and its leader march into the Labour camp, with drums beatipg and colours flying? To bring substantial force to Labour" in support of their common »aims would bring overwhelming advantage. It is an argument, of very special appeal to the new party, which tells us in its latest manifesto that it intends to arrange for contesting sixty to seventy seats at the next general elect-ion. The manifesto said nothing about expecting to gain them all, but these manifestoes are always so exemplary in their modesty that victory always rides between the lines, unblushing, but not. uneefen. Sometimes, indeed, it is never seen again, except when concealment, like a worm in the bud, feeds on the damaged cheek, of defeat. To be sure, there are other points not cordially embraced by the Labour Party, such- as industrial efficiency, closer co-opera-tion between -Labour and Capital, payments by results, increased production, strikes and lock-outs made illegal, and compulsory arbitration. But between this list and the other there is plenty of compromising material. For 1 example, if lock-outs were struck out from the bar of illegality, and if compulsory: arbitration left compliance with the verdicts optional to one side of each dispute, progress might he made towards a common platform, under the mighty stimulus of great purpose, driving towards State banking, the elective executive, and “midday meals at small cost.” We need not pursue the point. It is, after all, the affair only of the parties concerned. The new platform, however, recognises that there must he some. process of binding. To binding it has ackfed borrowing and bribery, the latter on a colossal scale. It has borrowed, in addition to. tlje “fourteen points” of Labour, increased production, development of hydro-electric power, close cooperation between Capital and Labour, agricultural colleges, .and classified immigration. So diligently has it done this work at the expense of all parties that ever had platforms, that it has neglected entirely the cultivation of the original faculty which, we preI sume, it possesses, at all events, in some degree. The bribery of the programme embraces all, from young children who are ■ to have free books and free lunches, to old people who are to have pensions' from the State whether they be millionaires or paupers, and to'sick people, who are to have free doctoring and free nursing—chicken and champagne and trips to the islands in winter are not mentioned, but the programme is at present only in skeleton form; and if there is anybody else who wants something free to pave his road .to the millennium, closer co-operation between the Labour Party and the new employers of the bribery weapon may bring them to light. - • Possibly it will be said that when parties are many and diverse, there must necessarily he a combination of the three B’s—Binding, Borrowing, and Possibly! Life is too sboft to argue the point when materialism sits on discussion as heavily as it does in these our .days. The better way is to keep these parties separate. The only thing'by which that can be done is proportional representation . If we can establish that on the Statute Book, every shade of opinion will be represented in the Legislature. It will even then he possible to use the machinery of the B’s. But there will be two advantages: (1) The use will be open; (2) it will be necessarily and honestly confined to the fundamental things which have practical value. This is the only serious conclusion we have drawn from the appearance of the new party, on the political horizon. For the rest, we have tried to show the leaders that, they have not done thqmselves jusTfee by their publication of a skeleton'programme which lends itself \ to ■ some criticism and more Wlion they give us a serious platform seri-. ously supported, without that slight, touch of flamboyancy so suggest!vok of easy victory over'inferior, persons, we shall give them the reeeptioif 4r they will merit, just as we have given them now the treatment they have deserved.