FEDERAL POLITICS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21530, 30 December 1931, Page 7

FEDERAL POLITICS

THE UNITED COUNTRY PARTY CABINET REPRESENTATION CONTROVERSY IN PRESS (United Press Association.) (By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) SYDNEY, December 29. (Received Dec. 29, at 10.30 p.m.) Mr J. A. Lyons expects to be able to announce the new Federal Cabinet on Thursday. The question of what representation the United Country Party will be given therein is the subject of press controversy, and constitutes a delicate aspect, for, although the Country Party emerged from the election with increased strength, the fact remains that the United Australia Party has an absolute majority over all other parties in the House of Representatives. A section of the press desires that the Country Party shall be given adequate representation. Several members of the Country Party met in Sydney and discussed the conditions under which the Country Party will co-operate with the United Australia Party in the formation of a new Cabinet, and it was agreed that Mr Lyons should exercise a free hand in making his choice, Country Party members being less concerned,, with office than with the adoption of a definite policy which will solve Australia’s difficulties and behind which the united parties can range themselves. Such a policy was agreed upon prior to the elections, the main features of it being as follow: 1. A revision of the tariff to reduce the cost of living and production. 2 Constitutional changes to enable the people of New South Wales to get control of their own affairs and automatically force Mr Lang to go to the people. 3. Means to deal effectually with Communists. Dr Earle Page, Leader of the Country Party, is willing, if desired, to act merely as a liaison between the new Government and the Country Party. Mr Lyons, who is now in Tasmania, declared that he wants a completely united party, and will consider any representations from the Country Party which will achieve that end. He has accordingly arranged to meet Dr Earle Page at Melbourne to-morrow. THE COOK SEAT MR GARDEN DEFEATED SYDNEY, December 29. (Received Dec. 30, at 2 a.m.) The distribution of preferences is now completed in the Macquarie electorate where the Minister of Defence (Mr J. B. Chifley) has been defeated by Mr J. Lawson, a member of the United Australia Party by 456 votes. Finality has also been reached in the Cook electorate where the sitting member, the Federal Labourite, Mr E. Riley, jun., triumphed over' the well-known Mr J. S. Garden, who is a Lang Plan candidate, by 713 votes. The result of this contest has been awaited with the greatest interest. Mr Garden’s defeat reduced the Lang Plan Party, otherwise the Beasleyites, to four in a House of 75. Hitherto they had five members. The state of the parties is as follows: United Australia Party . . 38 United Country Party 16 Independents .. . , 2 Federal Labour . . , . 14 Beasleyites 4 Doubtful . . .... . . 1 The progress of the Senate count is extremely slow and tedious. The United Australia Party candiates continue to maintain a substantial lead over all other parties, except in Queensland, when- the three retiring senators are likely to be defeated. NEW ERA ENTERED UPON A RETURN TO SANITY (From Oub Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, December 24. A vast majority of the people of Australia regard the new Government as the best Christmas box they have received for many a long day. It is felt that at last a new era has been entered upon ■ —a definite return not only to stability, but to sanity. Of course, Mr Scullin was never regarded as extreme, and there are many who will go so far as to say that he should actually be in the Lyons camp; however, he has seen fit to allow himself to be influenced by those who would nationalise banking and embark on wild inflation schemes that could have brought nothing but disaster to the Commonwealth. It is quite clear that Mr Theodore was too strong for Mr Scullin, and that he forced. his chief into byways that ho had no desire to tread. Mr Scullin has paid the penalty, and so has Mr Theodore, but in the case of Mr Theodore it was not his policy that defeated him, but the Lang “machine,” still all-powerful in the industrial centres within the metropolitan areas. The election must go down in history as the most remarkable Australia has seen since the days of Federation. The Labour Government had more than nine months in office to run, when it was forced to the country by the votes of those men who were pledged to support it. Undoubtedly urged on by the Premier of New South Wales, it was more out of personal spite than anything else that the five Beasley men in the House of Representatives —Lang planners and breakaways from the Federal Labour Party—forced the election, and on the night of the poll, as Labour man after Labour man was defeated, they cheered. What satisfaction has Mr Lang and his followers achieved? They say that they are satisfied. Satisfied with what? Satisfied with the ignominious defeat of Labour, and the installation of a party pledged to sanity? No, hardly that, but satisfied above all things with the political eclipse of Mr Theodore. Mr Theodore’s crushing defeat, as has already been pointed out, was not due to the banking and inflation policy he had advocated. He stood in an electorate that, in ordinary circumstances, would have said “ Yes ” to anything he proposed —the strongest Labour constituency in the State of New South Wales. Incidentally, it also contains more Lang supporters than any other, and on it Mr Lang concentrated most, of his efforts. Mr Theodore was doomed from the start, because, the Trades Hall said so, and it is remarkable that a man of his qualities—for lie certainly has manyshould have been defeated by a timber worker who has been on the list of unemployed for 18 months. Mr J. S. Rosevear, who displaces Mr Theodore in Dailey, sought selection on the occasion of tiie last election, but was handsomely defeated by Mr Theodore. He became one of Mr Theodore’s staunchest supporters. A great deal of water lias flowed beneath the bridge since then, and during the whirlwind campaign that has just been concluded be attacked bis foi ■mcr friend with a bitterness that displayed no limits. Perhaps the greatest election figure was that of a man who took no actual part in the campaign—Sir Robert Gib-

son, chairman of the Commonwealth Bank.. “ Not one penny for inflation ” were the watchwords with which he met the demands of the Federal Treasurer (Mr Theodore). To that he resolutely adhered, in spite of all the pressure that could be brought upon him. In a sense, the election may be regarded as a triumph for Sir Otto Niemeyer, wellknown in New Zealand, for Sir Robert Gibson was out and out a supporter of Niemeyer principles. It has been Sir Robert Gibson who has all along foiled Mr Theodore, and Sir Robert who foiled Mr Lang. It was Sir Robert who forced the adoption of the Premiers’ Plan, and Sir Robert who forced Mr Lang to abide by that plan. With his grim Scottish stubbornness he has won through, and Australia will he the better for it. He lias suffered much abuse at the hands of Mr Lang, and Mr Lang now will be more under his thumb than ever, for Sir Robert will have a sympathetic Government at Canberra. It is going to be very bard for Mr Lang from now on, and already scores of people are asking how long lie will be able to carry on. His finances are in a bad way, and although he has not yet completed one-half of the current financial year, he is already £16,000,000 to the bad. He has not been adhering strictly to the Premiers’ Plan, which provided that all the Governments should live within their means, and it is clear now that his hands will be forced. It cannot be long before he goes cap in hand to the Loan Council once again for further accommodation, and in view of the political landslide against him, he is likely to receive but scant sympathy. It is suggested that before two months are passed he will find difficulty in meeting the salaries of the civil servants, just as he did when the Loan Council last came to his assistance. This time he may not be so fortunate, and if he is unable to pay salaries there will be nothing for him to do but resign. Mr Lang lias been in office only a year—his term has two years to run—but those closely in touch with the trend of events predict an election in the State before three months have passed. Of course, the wish may be father to the thought. It is expected that if Mr Lang suffers a further rebuff in the Legislative Council he will ask the Governor to approve of further appointments to the Upper House. In some quarters it is maintained that the result of Saturday’s election would he sufficient to justify a refusal to grant the request. Compared with the last State elections Mr Lang has lost ground everywhere, and even in the big industrial centres close to the city the combined votes polled by Federal and State Labour candidates are down on the average 3000. A little more than a year ago Mr Lang won several country seats, but in the Federal election these were all distinctly nonLabour. The swing of votes in New South Wales has been the most gratifying result of the Federal poll as far as the anti-Socialist forces are concerned, and must come as a big blow to the dictatorial Sydney Trades Hall. In fact, Queensland was the only State that did not reveal a Labour swing. The greatest surprise of the poll was the distinct possibility that the United Australian Party—actually the old Nationalists—would itself have a clear majority in the House of Representatives. Throughout the campaign it was regarded as inevitable that a combination of the United Australian Party and the United Country Party would be necessary to fo'rm a Ministry. It was not regarded within the reach of possibility that the United Australian Party alone could command a majority of the House. The extent of the Lang fight, however, falsified even the most optimistic calculations. The Lang supporters did not gain a single seat outside New South Wales, but their influence was felt everywhere, to the benefit of the United Australia Party. So far as the United Australia Party is concerned the desire will probably be to welcome the Country Party as partners in the task of attacking the problems that confront Australia. However, in the past a section of the Country Party has been opposed to composite Ministries, and even now the party might prefer to adopt the role of friendly critic. Public opinion probably favours a composite Ministry. It will probably be found that the Country Party will have representation on the new Ministry, but it seems pretty definite at this stage that Dr Earle Page, Leader of the Country Party, will not return to the Treasury. It is likely that the new administration will be known as the Lyons-Latham Ministry at the express wish of Mr Lyons. Mr Latham will undoubtedly be the deputy-leader, for Mr Lyons has a great admiration for him. The Treasurer will probably be the former Prime Minister (Mr S. M. Bruce), whose reentry into politics is generally applauded outside Labour circles. Mr Bruce’s “ come-back ” was remarkable for be received a great majority. Mr E. J. Holloway, who defeated Mr Bruce when the latter was Prime Minister and thereby gained world-wide fame, saw the writing on the wall, and chose a “safe” Melbourne industrial seat on this occasion. The wisdom of his action has been proved beyond doubt, but his reputation for courage lias gained nothing. Another remarkable “ comeback ” was that of Mr W. A. Holman, former Premier of New South Wales, who for years has been seeking a reentry into politics. He has been one of the staunchest supporters of Nationalism, and his reward is a fitting one. One of the greatest swines occurred in Parramatta, a Sydney suburban seat, where a Labour man was defeated by Mr F. H. Stewart, a new figure in Australian politics. Mr Stewart is (or was) a bus proprietor, and philanthropist, and he is financing the attack by Norman ("Wizard”) Smith on the land speed record at the Ninety Mile Beach in New Zoalamd early next month.

Apart from finance, which will be based on solid, conimonsense lines, the chief policy measures of the new administration will concern the tariff and industrial arbitration. The attitude of the successful United parties to the tariff is clear and definite. The existing schedules, under the temporary validating Bill passed to enable the dissolution to take place, remain in force until the end of February. The action to be taken by the new Government in reviewing the schedules will be based on the foundation that, as a general rule, no duty should be imposed until the Tariff Board has first approved of it. Many of the duties in the existing schedule have either not been considered by the Tariff Board, or have been strongly opposed to it. This is the field of duties in which revision and reduction are likely. Both parties agree that adequate protection must be given to the secondary industries. There will be no sudden or drastic changes. Both successful parties arc definitely pledged to make no material alteration in the Federal Arbitration Act, unless approval of the change is first given by the people in a referendum. The united forces are anxious to simplify the procedure and to remove duplication and overlapping. The question of holding a referendum in order to give the people opportunity of conferring full powers on the Common wealth to fix standard hours and a uniform wage in all the States will receive the early attention of the new Cabinet.