THE WAIPA POST. Printed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. SATURDAY, 26th MAY, 1934. POLITICAL SENSATIONALISM.

Waipa Post, Volume 48, Issue 3471, 26 May 1934, Page 6

THE WAIPA POST. Printed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. SATURDAY, 26th MAY, 1934. POLITICAL SENSATIONALISM.

QUITE a lot could be said about public petitions. They can be, and at times are, a worthy means of expressing public desire. On the other hand, they are not incapable of a vastly different purpose—of serving an end which is not revealed in the innocent phrasing of the prayer to which the petitioners subscribe. The sensible individual demands that he shall know a good deal more about a petition than is expressed in its pleadings, for after all it is a document which is intended shall command respect and which therefore should not be lightly drawn. In these days of unrest, when the advocates of no end of “ isms ” and “ ents ” are busily at work assuring the citizen of highlyexperimental cure-alls for the national ills, when- we are encouraged to believe that only our administrators fail to see the simplicity of the whole economic problem, people have to be wary lest they stumble into a bottomless abyss. Smarting under a- condition which demands the sacrifice of things which were once enjoyed, suffering the disability of a limited spending power, rebelling at the prevalence of a restriction which an unseen hand has imposed, most people are apt to forsake a normal balance. It has been remarkable how hard times have narrowed the horizon until only self has a place in the landscape. Tempers have become frayed, and little wonder that people who really do know better are so very apt to give.way to sensationalism and make-believe. When such a mood prevails the community is exposed to the pranks of the adventurer, and may very readily fall viqtim to a sulbtle schemer who masquerades as a public benefactor. Yesterday a canvasser with a petition from Auckland made his appearance in Te Awamutu, and presented a prayer which, though innocent enough in itself, was in reality of very grave portent. Simply phrased, it calls upon the Government to cause an immediate appeal to the electors, and it thereby implies dissatisfaction with the legislation which extended the life of the present Parliament. If the issue stopped at a protest against the Government little need be worried about. As a matter of fact, it must have become embarrassing to the Government to have so much advice tendered in the form of protest. Hardly an hour of the day passes without somebody is heard condemning those in authority and assuring an audience how much better New Zealand’s affairs could be conducted if—. Gesture is always so easy: performance is quite another thing. Regarded in the light of all that is going on around us to-day, it could be stated in all truth that the greatest sufferers through an extension of the life of Parliament is the Government itself. It has an unenviable task. 'lnstead of abuse it is entitled to the thanks of the people for what is being attempted, against tremendous odds, for a year longer than was originally intended. But to return to this petition. W’e are told that it emanates from Queen Street in Auckland city. Beyond that, little more is available for an appraisement of its value, and certainly we are not to be permitted to know just what the ultimate motive may be. The petitioners want an election .—and that is all there is to it. Well, why do they want an election ? Not, surely, for the return of the present Government! Then, who would they elect ? Surely this somebody .somewhere in Queen Street, Auckland, must imagine Te Awamutu to be a hotbed of simplicity. In Te Awamutu at this moment could be found hundreds of electors who dislike this legislation, and that regulation, but who, nevertheless, are not prepared to cast the ship of State adrift in mid-stream. Moreover, they are not so gullible as to imagine a somebody somewhere in Queen Street would send into their midst a disciple to lead them into the promised land. This philandering generosity of a zealous patriot is rather too much of a good-will action to have popular acceptance. It rather baffles comprehension: more likely, it awakens sus-

picion. Te Awamutu is not unmindful of

the sinister forces at work just now to uproot popular Government in this country. It is quite an open secret that one particular sect has seized upon the times for a vigorous attempt to weaken the administration. These people are grasping on every protest, no matter how well-intended it may be, to fan the ftre of discontent. By magnifying complaint, by distorting fact, they strive to embarrass the Government, and bring about its overthrow. It is a beastly political subtei’fuge; more than that, it it a wicked assault on the country’s security. After all, any fool can destroy. To say what should be requires no physical, and hardly any mental effort. And so these people by subtle methods which foment discontent, seek their own political ends. They would have an election to-mor-row, well knowing that New Zealand is apt to accept sensation and forget reality. If the Government can be prevailed upon to accept responsibility for another year it deserves thanks for doing so. By then, let it be hoped, most of the ruling difficulties will have been bridged. By then, also, New Zealand may not so readily fall victim to the sensationmongers.

The inconsistency of this petition f is revealed when it is remembered that the Government is beset on every hand with tasks that really matter. Never before have New Zealand’s politics been so international. Never in the history of this country has so much responsibility reposed in the Government. It calls for undivided attention. Yet, in his petition and in countless other ways we would call upon the Government to fritter away valuable time and energy investigating petty complaints and satisfying our prying curiosity about things that are really insignificant. To suggest that at the behest somebody from somewhere in Queen Street we should divert the Government’s attention from any one of the really important and pressing problems of the day to the consideration of what might be, for all we know, a manoeuvre for political advantage, is to aver that we have lost our sense of proportion entirely. The plain fact is that w e have not. Somebody in Queen Street had better set about doing his own job instead of calling on little remote, innocent, and susceptible Te Awamutu to do it for him. What complaints we have we are competent to express; our protests, too, we can communicate in our own way without “ leadership ” from Queen Street. And we are not going to let Queen Street put into our hands a spade so that we may, for Queen Street, start or continue the digging which will undermine the Government.