THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, October 23, 1937. THE COMMONWEALTH ELECTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23330, 23 October 1937, Page 12

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, October 23, 1937. THE COMMONWEALTH ELECTION

To-day the people of Australia will go to the polls in a general election. The fight is broadly between the forces representing Labour and those which are oppposed to Socialism and all its works. Labour requires to win at least ten seats to defeat the Government led by Mr Lyons, which is a coalition of the United Australia and United Country Parties. In the last Parliament the Government had a majority of 18, the strength of the United Australia Party at the dissolution being 31, that of the United Country Party 15, and that of Labour—Federal and Lang groups combined —28. Mr Lyons is appealing to the electors for a third term of office, the Coalition having entered into its possession of the Treasury benches in 1931, at a time when the Commonwealth was beginning to feel the direst effects of the economic depression. Apart from the circumstance of contiguity which tends to focus attention in this country on the course of Australian politics, the people of New will be doubly interested on this occasion to learn whether the experience of the Dominion under a Labour Administration has any effect on the mind of the Commonwealth voter. There is a definite similarity between the policies advocated on behalf of Australian Labour by Mr Curtin and those in practice in New Zealand. Federal Socialism does not differ greatly in content from the New Zealand brand, and if the Australian electors make their choice for it they should do so at least with a fair knowledge of the possible consequences of their decision. On the eve of the election, opinion in the Commonwealth is doubtful of the issue. A few weeks ago the Government's supporters were more than sanguine of success. It is stated now, however, that war scare propaganda, with the bogey of conscription unwarrantably attached by Labour to the return of the Lyons Government, may vitally affect its chances. That remains to be seen. The Australian people, if they have followed the campaign issues intelligently, should be able to determine for themselves the worth of this effort to stampede public opinion. Experience, in this country as elsewhere, has amply proved the unwisdom of attempting to forecast an election result, but it is interesting to note that City opinion in Sydney expects the Government to go back, though with a reduced majority. The Lyons Government has steered the Commonwealth through difficult times into the present period of prosperity. It has administered the national finances with prudence but without parsimony. It has kept taxation within moderate bounds, despite the fact that it has committed the country, in the present year, to an abnormally heavy expenditure on defence. It has energised industry and encouraged a notable expansion of

internal manufacturing. It has given an assurance of security to private enterprise In all spheres—a condition to which the present prosperous state of the Commonwealth is due in very great measure. Mr Lyons's proposals for the future include a wide extension of social services and reforms in other spheres. Labour proposes the arbitrary restriction of hours of labour, unemployment insurance, though not on a contributory basis —wherein Mr Curtin's policy differs from that of the Government —and political control of banking and credit. But it is on the vital question of defence provision, it seems, that the election may be won or lost. The Labour leader has modified his earlier qualified approval of the Government's defence programme, so that he now appears as the champion of what, has been described as an " isolationist policy." The principle of compulsory military service is anathema to Mr Curtin and his followers. While they would prepare Australia to act in its own defence, for which they deem a strong Air Force to be the first essential, there would be, under Labour, "no compulsion on any citizen to serve on foreign battlefields." Whether there would be compulsion even for home defence has not been made clear. The Government contemplates the further strengthening of the navy and coastal defences, but its air programme does not go far enough to satisfy Labour's requirements. These issues the electors will doubtless weigh fully, but it will be surprising if they conclude that a defence policy which appears to deny that Australia has any responsibilities as an Empire unit in- a co-ordinated plan for the resistance of aggression can possibly receive their endorsement. The record of the Lyons Government would appear to entitle it to receive once more the confidence of the electors. It promises adherence to governmental methods of proved value, as against a programme of experimentation not unlike that which is giving the people of New Zealand food for.serious thought at the moment. Labour's challenge, nevertheless, will be a serious one, for it has patched up its internal quarrels, temporarily it may be, and will oppose the Government in a united effort. Three years ago there was some vote-spitting, especially in New South Wales, where State Labour and Federal Labour candidates divided the vote against themselves. That condition will be absent to-day.