The Daily News. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER. 24, 1922. POLITICAL HALF-WAY HOUSE.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 November 1922, Page 4

The Daily News. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER. 24, 1922. POLITICAL HALF-WAY HOUSE.

It is quite possible that impartial observers of the result, of the recent elections in the Mother Country will be chiefly surprised at the great stride made by Labor in obtaining 141 seats, thus gaining the large increase of fifty-eight, and becoming the second strongest party in the House. The claim put forward in the Labor manifesto that “the party won its sweeping triumph because of the solid support of the great mass of the electors, who definitely turned away from Liberalism and Conservatism,” appears to be well founded. If this assertion has any special significance, which evidently it has, the meaning can only be that the electors are not only surfeited with compromises, but have arrived at the conclusion that it is time to jettison the half-way houses in polities, and rely upon one extreme counteracting the other. “It is plain,” adds the manifesto, “that all the progressive elements of the country. . .

are being gathered up by the Labor Party, and that the sole alternative to a Conservative Government is a Labor Government.” If this contention is carefully examined it will be found to contain a. great, truth, though probably not of the kind to accord with the aims of Labor. In the first place, theoretically, Parliament exists for the government of the country in accordance with the will of the people as expressed by members who are elected by a majority of votes in each constituency. It is unnecessary in commenting on the general situation to refer to the question of minority members or the means for remedying that defect. In reality party government is a struggle for power and the fruits of office. Were this not a positive fact there would be no half-way house in polities—no Conservatives, Liberals, National Liberals, Independents or Reformers. There would only be the two extremes, the Constitutionalists and the Socialists—the sheep and the goats. Much has been written and said about Labor Governments of one kind or another in most civilised countries, and as a result Labor is generally understood politically to mean Socialism, Communism, and everything that is extreme. But the appelation is a misnomer which robs true Labor of its dignity. As a matter of fact the great majority of mankind comes under the designation of Labor, and it would seem that the time has arrived to entirely recast the political divisions which no longer have their true meaning. The self-respect-ing, loyal and patriotic workers, both men and women, who lorm the bulk of the white people in the British Empire resent very bitterly being classed with Socialists, Communists and Bolsheviks They have nothing in common with the extremists, and would hail a new designation with great pleasure. Now that there is practically little, if any, difference between Liberals and Conservatives, both in Britain and New Zealand, it seems absurd to perpetuate ancient divisions iqerely for the sake of keeping up a half-way house in politics that is too decayed and weather-beaten to be of any real service. Never before has sane and loyal Labor had such a chance of establishing a solid and progressive party. By severing all connection with the extremist.? and becoming a great constructive party, Labor, as the backbone of the country, is capable of becoming an immense factor for good instead of evil, and especially in' regard to the attainment of industrial peace and progress. While it is only Tight and just that all legitimate interests should be represented in Parliament, the paramount need is a strong, sound and progressive administration, with an Opposition sufficient to make its strength felt for the good of the country. If Labor is to constitute that Opposition it must possess sanity and breadth of view, as well as administrative ability; above all loyalty and love of country. With the elimination of the half-way house in polities would come a vast improvement in national affairs.

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION. Proportional representation, the advocacy of ’which forme part of the stock-in-trade of many political candidates just now, sounds quite well, and in theory seems attractive, but we venture the opinion that if its advocates were to study its operations in countries where it has been tried they would drop it like a hot potato. They would not have far to go to make the study, for the system has been in use in New South Wales for a few year j, and the singular thing is that the Labor Party, which was responsible for its introduction there, has now no; a good word to say for .it. Their rout at the last election they largely ascribe to l it, and if ever they get into power again it is possible that they will jettison the system and go back to the “first past the post” system, with all its faults. Local representation under it is impossible. It would be necessary in Taranaki, to amalgamate three constituencies, say Waitomo, Taranaki and Stratford, whilst Egmont, Patea and Wanganui would form another constituency. Each constituency would have three members as now, but with the important difference that they would represent, or try to represent, the whole and not a part, as now. This would clearly be impossible. To-day Waitomo is perhaps one of the most scattered and most difficult constituencies in the Dominion, and it tries even an old and experienced campaigner like Mr. Jennings to keep in touch with all parts of his electorate. How, then, would a man fare in endeavoring to represent not only Waitomo, but Taranaki and Stratford? It simply cannot be done. This is a ’fatal objection to its introduction, but there are also other disadvantages which put it out of court in New Zealand. It destroys the country quota, an advantage to which the country districts are admittedly entitled. It favors the operations of the political machine, eliminating the independent entirely, and causes the return of weak men. It fails to achieve proportional representation, as is shown by the fact that in New South Wales in 1920 the Labor Party polled 285,752 votes and its opponents 378,571 votes, yet Labor secured half the seats, and by jerrimandering was later able to carry on the Government with a majority of cne for two years, and incidentally plunged the country into such debt and losses that at the elections in May last the party was swept from power. The working of the system is very complicated, and it is not at all surprising that a large percentage of the votes cast were informal, in one electorate the number being 11.5 of the total. As far as we have studied the system, and observed its working in New South Wales, it has nothing whatever to commend it, and we are surprised that it should figure so largely on the political programmes of several of the candidates now wooing the electors of this province. It is a party sliibboleth, nothing more nor Jess, and cannot have been carefully studied by those who are so insistent in their advocacy of a measure that would do a great deal of harm to and is totally unsuitable in a sparsely populated country like New Zealand.