The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET, AUCKLAND MONDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1929 THE TAIL WAGS THE DOG

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 841, 9 December 1929, Page 8

The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET, AUCKLAND MONDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1929 THE TAIL WAGS THE DOG

■‘IF they do well, God bless them —if they do badly, speed them.” I That was how Mr. Lloyd George, in a rousing speech in the Rhondda Valley two months ago, expressed the Liberals’ attitude and mind toward the Labour Government and its party. And he made it clear that the life of the MacDonald Administration depended entirely upon what the fifty-eight Liberals in the House of Commons said and did. The Liberal Leader was generous enough, however, to add that his party would exercise its power with restraint. Still, there was nothing in Mr. Lloyd George’s address to the Welsh miners to indicate a rapprochement (as now reported from London) between Labour and the Liberals in order to stabilise the minority Government in office for a long term and secure co-operation for the “conquest of unemployment.” On the contrary, he was, if anything definite at all, scornful and a bit provocative. In a lofty sphere of metaphor, the self-styled thinker for the Liberal Party likened the Labour Government to an airship which, so far, had cruised in fairly good weather. It had experienced a little rough weather at The Hague, but the “firm, good pilotage of Mr. Philip Snowden” had steered it clear of difficulties. Crosswinds at Geneva had driven the craft hack promptly into its hangar, and in the gale of unemployment the ship was having difficulty in getting out of the shed. As for the coal-mining storm, the Government looked like taking refuge in the airdrome he set up ten years ago. So, he went on, without giving an inkling of any party intention to bring the gas-ship down to earth, and depend on less inflated means of political progress. No doubt it would be all for the good of the nation if the British Parliament could return to its traditional two-party system, and thus get rid of abnormal difficulties and several disturbing elements. There are now three organised parties in the House—two of them possessing considerable numerical strength, and one which represents but a remnant of its former power as a party. Labour musters 291 members, Conservatives 257, Liberals 58, while a miscellaneous group of men, who apparently do not know their own politics, numbers nine members. The Government is not only in a hopeless minority, but has to grapple ceaselessly with the problem of “keeping a House” ready for any emergency. Nominally, there are two Oppositions, but in practice, as in the New Zealand House of Representatives, there is only one, for if both combined on a test question the Government, which lives on sufferance, would be driven out of office. .So far, Labour and the Liberals have been more often allies than enemies, and this fact probably has encouraged the belief or hope that they are moving forward arm-in-arm to a better understanding at least, if not toward a definite coalition. Meanwhile, the tail wags the dog, and no dog could tolerate too long such a grotesque derangement of power. As in this country, there is so little difference between the ' two parties representing Radicalism and Socialism in Great Britain that they might well form one party without many observers noticing that Tweedledum had become Tweedledee. But coalitions have never been enjoyed in British Parliaments, and wherever they have been tried and tolerated their success, except during wartime, when political party interests had to be smothered, has depended largely on a generous practice of cupboard love, the weaker part of the coalition always enjoying a great indulgence in good things. A change in national circumstances ought to bring about a different approach, hut politicians are like the Ethiopian’s hue and the leopard’s spots. The political situation in the United Kingdom today is such as to call for more co-operation between rival parties, and particularly between the Labour Government and the Liberal Party whose policies are so similar that the worst difference separating the parties is a lively indignation concerning recriminatory charges that each steals its best ideas from the other. Since both claim to have a common purpose with very little dissimilarity in legislative programme, they ought to go a little farther and agree to common action. Already the Liberals have guaranteed a fair and friendly reception to the Labour Government’s proposals, providing that these arc not too Socialistic in purpose and effect, hut such a guarantee cannot be made effective so long as the Administration feels that the slightest error in judgment would precipitate a crisis and bring about its downfall. It may be too much to expect a coalition of the parties, but if they can maintain a friendly co-opera-tion until such time, at least, as enables the Government to exploit its full programme of remedial legislation, the industries of Great Britain will or should gain essential relief.

THE DEER MENACE

IN 1928 the sum of £6,000 was spent in an effort to check the deer menace in outlying pastoral districts. This expenditure resulted in the destruction of 60,000 deer. To people unacquainted with the extent of the problem this would seem a large enough number to suggest that there is not another hoof in the country. Actually, however, the record of 1928 serves only to show the magnitude of the problem. Though 60,000 deer were slaughtered, the menace today to farms and forests is as acute as ever. The measures adopted by the Government simply amounted to temporising with the problem. Too many strings were pulled to allow farmers and forestry officers a free hand. The trouble is that a number of people in New Zealand do not want to solve the deer problem, or at least, only within certain narrow limits. Their enthusiasm about helping the farmer whose grain fields can be ruined overnight by a trampling and destructive herd of deer is qualified by the belief that while one or two deer here and there might be killed off in the interests of pastoral security, the bulk of the herds should he guaranteed some sort of immunity so that they may he maintained intact for the benefit of licensed sportsmen. From the acclimatisation societies’ point of view there may be some justification for this attitude, but where the interests of sportsmen and the interests of farmers conflict so sharply, then sentiment should not be permitted to stand in the way. In 1925 the Reform Government proclaimed an open season for deer. The pretty, fleet-footed creatures were to be outlawed so that any man might shoot them. But this plan was modified as a result of influence brought to hear on the Government, and it was only in certain limited areas, mainly in the South Island, that unrestricted shooting was authorised. Meanwhile deer continue to increase in the North. In the Taupo District, the Rangitaiki Valley, the East Coast, the .Wanganui District, and in Wairarapa and Horowlienua, they are an unmitigated pest. Not even the kitchen gardens, within one hundred yards of the farmers’ homesteads. are immune from their attacks. . They can jump the highest fence, and move so quickly that only by organised measures and the proclamation of open seasons will the conference to be convened early, next year by the Hon. P. A. de la Perrelle find a solution to the problem.