Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, FRIDAY, FEB. 4, 1938. NATIONAL PARTY POLICY

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19550, 4 February 1938, Page 4

Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, FRIDAY, FEB. 4, 1938. NATIONAL PARTY POLICY

The policy statement issued by the Leader of the Opposition at Taihape last evening will be studied with close interest throughout the Dominion Probably never before in the history of the country have the people been so politically minded as at present and, since this is election year, it is inevitable that the policies of the rival parties should be closely examined It is not always an easy matter for the public to analyse and distinguish between the platforms of political parties, but on this occasion there should be infinitely less difficulty than i; usual, because the difference has largely been narrowed down to thW one outstanding issue of socialism versus private enterprise. Although at the last election little was heard of the Labour Party’s paramount plank of the nationalisation of distribution production, and exchange, during its first two years in office the Labour Government has gone a considerable distance along the road in this direction, and the question to be decided by the electors before the end of the present year is whether to sanction the further extension of these principles or to revert to the policy of individual liberty and freedom that has characterised the progress of the Dominion in the past. If they consider that it is time a halt was called to the continuous encroachment on their freedom they must, perforce, vote for the National Party, and even at this stage it is none too early to consider what that party has to offer. Mr. Hamilton’s statement does not profess to be more than a preliminary outline of some of the major planks, but it does go sufficiently far to enable the public to assess the broad principles for which his party stands. To frame a truly national policy is obviously a difficult task; it is a comparatively easy matter to bring down a programme designed to attract one section of the community, possibly at the expense of others, but to outline a plan that has as its object the serving of the best interests of all sections is something entirely different. That has been Mr. Hamilton’s aim and, at the very least, he has achieved a commendable measure of success. At no point can he be accused of creating factional or sectional friction; rather has ho presented a well-balanced programme which, if given effect to, would unquestionably advance the interests of the people as a whole. Nor can it be said that, at this stage, he shows evidence of political astuteness, for the programme, far from being a vote-catching one full of attractive promises for immediate fulfilment, takes a long view of the needs of the Dominion and aims at placing its economy and its finances on a sound foundation. And, after all, it is only by creating sound foundations that it will be possible to build a measure of prosperity in which all classes of the community can share.

It is not surprising that Mr. Hamilton’s statement should show a bias against socialism and all that it entails, and his proposals are characterised, more than anything else, by the demand for the restoration of individual liberty. The party, he says, stands for private enterprise, for the small trader, the small farmer, and ihe small shopkeeper, and their right to economic freedom. It strenuously opposes socialism and regimentation and also the monopolistic ownership and control of industry by the State. The demand for freedom is again emphasised in the claim that the farmer should have the right to manage his own affairs and in the pledge that the rights of appeal to the law courts would be restored. In these things, at least, the party’s policy should meet with general approval, lor few would be prepared openly to admit that they would willingly sacrifice their liberties to the dictates of a bureaucratic State. Here, therefore, Mr. Hamilton is on sound ground, and he strikes another popular

note when he insists that the smallest amount of taxation possible should be collected consistent with the proper functions of democratic government, and that industry and enterprise should be encouraged to develop, thus increasing purchasing power and reducing the cost of living. That emphasis should be placed on the importance of primary production is inevitable in a country whose whole economic fabric depends upon the export of raw materials and foodstuffs, and in this and other respects Mr. Hamilton rightly insists on the closest co-operation with Great Britain,

"who will always be our best customer and whose interests are inseparable lrom ours." Following this is a constructive policy for land settlement, but that the National Party is far from being a farmers’ party is made clear by the cons'derable space that is devoted to secondary industries. Here, again, however, there is restraint and the long view which demands that industries should be of economic value to the Dominion. It is insisted, also, that industry should pay the highest wage rates that it can afford, and, perhaps even more important, that the purchasing power of wages should be preserved in relation to the cost of living. The statement contains some salient points which merit a careful examination, and if this is given it will be found that as a broad basis of a political policy it contains virtually nothing with which thinking and freedomloving people can seriously disagree but that, on the contrary, it enunciates certain well-defined principles which will receive widespread endorsement. Above all else, it further clarifies the one vital issue which will confront the people at the next elections.