The Liberal Programme.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIX, Issue 24, 15 December 1919, Page 8

The Liberal Programme.

A LAST WORD TO THE ELECTORS

(Published by Arrangement.)

In view of the persistent misrepresentations of the Masseyite Press regarding Sir Joseph "Ward's “piactorm” and his financial methods. 1 it is desirable in the Liberal interest that the following considerations should be brought under the notice of the general public, to enable them to come to a just decision upon the merits of the Liberal policy before polling day. An important section of the New Liberal Programme deals (with the needs of our SOLDIERS. Sir Joseph Ward proposed more effective methods for aiding and training the maimed or invalided men; and ho is prepared to adoppt a more vigorous- policy of LAND SETTLEMENT to enable the returned soldiers to get on. to the land under favorable conditions with at least a reasonable chance of making a good living. The other day, Mr Massey, being forced to admit that “Reform” lias failed lamentably m its duty of providing land for the returned men, publicly declared that it* was a mistake to attempt, to put the soldiers on first-class land—they ought to go on to “virgin land,” rough country, and break it up for themselves so as to get experience! Of course. Mr Massey does not want, to see Jus good friends, the big landowners, disturbed, and so he advises that the. returned men should be sent* out into the wilderness to learn how to make a living there. THE LAND QUESTION/.

tins is characteristic or iterorm policy toward the gravest of all the problems that! this country ana res rulers have to solve—the problem ot LAND SEITfiEMiSNT. The failure of the “Reform” Tarty to carry oh the great work of Liberalism by breaking down the LAND MONOPOLY and. breaking up the big estates, is one of the most discreditable blots upon their record, and they know it quite well. Mr Massey is trying to coyer his failure now by assuring the .; people that last year the “Reform” Government passed some of the most drastic legislation ever carried, to (destroy the Land Monopoly and provide land for the people. But it is one thing to pass laws and quite another thing to administer them . Everybody knows that when the Messeyites were stumping the country appealing for help to turn out the Liberals in 1911. they made a score of promises—to reduce taxation, and expenditure an# borrowand the cost of living, and so on—not one of which have they performed. In: 1913 they passed one of the. most ■ stringent and drastic; enactments to be found in our Statufee.ißook for breaking, up'-aue big. estates,, and forcing the- big land-owners iitoiisell—and to this day, ( »ot. one estaitei has ever been taken over in terms of,.that, Act. !• Masseyism promises,« but , will not •' :operforin—;therefore Liberalism must come tot the country’s rescue. Of course; the Masseyites are very, solicitous about the welfare of “The Man on the LahtlT; The other day-, the “Dominion’ produced a huge advertisement dilating on the importance of the “Big Five”—our great agricultural and pastoral industries—and assuring the country that so long as everything goes well with “The Man on the Land,” everything will be for bestj under, the best possible of Governments. No one is likely to deny that the “Reformers”—-whose policy, is dictated and controlled by the great 1 land monopolists—have done everything in their power to help “The Man on the Land.” But they ally forget to mention tWat if .ft had nop been for tile Liberal Land Legislation which the Masseyites opposed so fiercely 25 years ago, there would bo aid Close Settlement anywhere ip. New Zealand, und the whole country ( (Would still be possessed by a few score big “squatters” and their sheep apd cattle. They also forget to mention' that if'it. bad not boon, for that “State Interference” on wheh the Liberals, in spite of Conservative opposition, have always insisted, and which Mr Massey still deplores, the settlers and farmers would have had no Agricultural Department to help them, no inspectors and instructors and lecturers, no dairy experts, no model farms, none of pur elaborate system of organisation for the improvement of our primary industries, the classification of our staple products and their transport to foreign markets—nothing in fact, of all the countless benefits and advantages and facilities that have practically created our frozen meat, dairy, poultry and fruit trade, and in a word, made Mr Massey’s “Big Five” what'they are to-day.

! But, granted that the “Reformers,” building qn» the foundations that were laid by Liberalism in spite of the resistance of the Masseyitqs a} generation back, have done a good deal for the “Man on the Land”—-the vitally important : issue in a young country is the PROMOTION OF SETTLEMENT.

Mr Massey boasts with, some truth that lie has helped the MAN “ALREADY ON THE LAND. What has ho done to put other men on the land ? That is the all-important question. The country knows how little he and his friends ever have done or will do in that direction. It is against “Reform” principles to break up the big estates because it means “interference” with “the sacred rights of the individual,” the privilege of “private enterprise” to create any monopoly, however huge or harmful, without any hindrance or control. But it is also against the “Reform” interests to interfpre with the big- Land-oWnei's because they are for Mr Massey “The

Power behind the Throne;” 'and he may not nun counter to their wishes. For all these reasons, the country’s only chance of breaking down the Land Monopoly and checking the constant aggregation which hag gone on so rapidly in recent years under “Reform,” and bringing land for settlement on reasonable terms within easy reach of the mass of the people—the country’s one hope for the future lies in Liberalism and in Liberalism alone.