The Daily News TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1931. LABOUR’S PROGRAMME.

Taranaki Daily News, 22 September 1931, Page 8

The Daily News TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1931. LABOUR’S PROGRAMME.

The manifesto issued by Mr. H. K Holland in the House of Representatives on Friday will not have gone very far to convince the country of the Laboui’ Party s ability to solve, its present financial and economic problems. The leader of the Labour Party described it as the report of the three Labour members of the Economic Committee on the result of their deliberations, but it is abundantly plain that the evidence they heard during the sittings of that body had little, if any, infftience . upon their pronouncement. The three membeis of the committee in the speeches they made in the House were at some pains to emphasise the contention that the witnesses had told them nothing they had notknown previously, this being,, of course, their way of justifying their complete disregard of the very serious warnings which impressed Mr. Coates and Mr. Forbes so strongly and their issue of an electioneering manifesto containing all the familiar, if specious, philosophy of their socialistic creed. Its compilation was, no doubt, a labour of love for the three members, but they .would certainly be disappointed, if they realised the extreme obviousness of the net they spread for unwary farmers, business men and everyone else with a vote. They have only succeeded in making it plain that Labour has no desire to be informed and instructed, but prefers to be blind to the economic facts of the world’s present situation and to waste its time in building mere castles in Spain. Labour steadfastly refuses to realise that this country, along with others, must adjust its needs to a new scale of income. The only economic solution of the problem of unemployment is, the manifesto tells us, “the rehabilitation in industry, at rates of wages that will provide a reasonable standard of living, of all who are now unemployed or working part time.” That is a delightful mouthful, as an American might say, but the question is not as to the desirability of this pleasant aspiration but as to the possibility of taking practical steps to bring it into effect. And on that point Labour is hopelessly unhelpful. “In the meantime,” it says, “the Government should make further provision for unemployed out of the Consolidated Fund, and additional grants should be made to Hospital Boards for the relief of distress.” Yes, this is charming idealism, but if the Consolidated Fund is to make “provision” it must have the means, and the really quite serious difficulty which everyone but Labour sees is that it has no means, or at least none to spare. But wait! Labour would raise internal loans, “guaranteed by the State,” and “the associated banks and the people of the Dominion” would be “invited directly and by means of a national campaign to assist in making the loans a success.” Labour certainly clings verya tightly to its belief that banks and other organisations, and even, it seems, individuals, possess great stores of money and if dhey could only be persuaded to give away all this cash everything would be all right. If Labour could realise the simple difference between credit and actual money and could understand that the country would be still worse off than it is to-day if funds needed elsewhere were diverted to the payment of excessive wages to relief workers, to heavy sustenance allowances and to such wild-cat schemes as guaranteed or subsidised prices for primary products, it might produce a programme worthy of consideration. As long as all its plans are based upon schemes for the manipulation of money it will fail to find a solution of current problems. If the world’s troubles, arc to some extent monetary there are many other causes, and so far

as this country is concerned they arc readily apparent. The rehabilitation of the unemployed in industry, to take an instance, is impeded by the effects of tariffs, by excessive taxation, by State interference in the conduct of business, and most of all by the crippling hand of Arbitration Court awards, which rob industries of their initiative and their power of expansion. If business generally were freed of artificial restrictions and subject only to the laws of economic action there would soon be a recovery. And a recovery brought about by natural means would have a sound prospect, of becoming permanent. Labour’s policy of high wages, high taxation, lavish State expenditure out of forced loans and State control of business might promote a false prosperity for a brief period, but it would be followed by a crash from which there could be no recovery. It is well, however, that Labour has formulated a programme. Its nature shows that the party is quite incapable of helping those who earnestly desire to overcome the national difficulties, and that Mr. Forbes and Mr. Coates did the right thing when they decided to rid themselves of the Labour hindrance before tackling their onerous task.