LABOUR PROMISES

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 278, 26 November 1935, Page 6

LABOUR PROMISES

Jsir, —By currency control t.*c I about I’arty definitely promise gir-iianteed prices; guaranteed employ mi**:; guaranteed wages; guaranteed happiness for all. Their whole edifice is built upon “guaranteed prices.” Tn is whole programme depends upon, hinges upon ‘•guaranteed prices ” It is quite obvious that they reai.’y do appear to think that man's whom happiness is loundej upon what they fondly 'liijk is “guaranteed. pikes.” The menu.-, whereby they propose to achieve 11.» r end is “currency control.” Could t-i-y--t-hing be more <h dishly innocen J IP t is it so innocent alter all?. Childish it is; but not so innocent. It is ie«fy founded upo i the n.tion that m.i f t»ial prosperity iS the basis of all g'jud, and nappiness, joy and peace—’t 'a gre: ■ and degcu.ir.ie materialism—s-j’ib'css materialism. Mon over it is that Lil of materialism that could not be brought into effect without disaster of a very material sort. The country in general, and the farmers no Jess, would feel just how very material would be the results of the Labour Party’s efforts, if that party were returned to power on November 27, 1935. This system of currency control would certainly throw the exchange on London into such sudden, and violent fluctuations as to definitely ruin all farming and other industries, trade and commerce. Suppose, however, they sought to establish their guaranteed prices by taxation, a course to which they would be quickly forced, despite all their talk, of currency control, the result would be the same—ruinous. This system being malerilistic in nature spells material ruin. Indeed, people are beginning to sense this already, I and nervousness is being expressed already at even the remote possibility of Labour being returned to power. Labour candidates arc plausible; they say:—“lt will take 50 years for us to bring into full execution our programme, so in three years we cannot go so very far, and if you find by next election our programme is unsatisfactory vou could throw us out.” They are angling for the unwary to give their basically unsound policy and programme a trial. One does not like to think, what they would do in any length of time, long or short, with such a programme and policy as they have. With the greater majority of electors there is perhaps a fear, some perturbation of heart, somewhat increased by the advent of a third party,; I the Democrat, to confuse the issue, lest the Labour I’arty be returned, The. Labour Party has been successful in j doing this, and the Democrats have | given some assistance in inducing this | sense because of nervousness because ; of vote-splitting. With the less num- : bcr of electors the Labour Party has > helped to create in their hearts or for I their hearts a sense of security, safety, and prosperity that is false —has no basis at all. If returned to power the Labour Party would increase the nervousness of the majority tenfold, and also disappoint the hopes of those who trusted them. The result would ncce.v sitrily be chaotic. It may be by a split vote that Labour will be returned. This is not at all desirable. No onewishes to see nervous tension increased and hopes disappointed; and there is no denying the fact that Labour's policy and programme will do just these very undesirable things—bring nervous tension and disappointment. Who is the vote-splitting party? What party is it that has come to confuse the issue? It is the Democrat (party. This is a positive fact. It is I time they knew themselves that they I cannot carry out what they propose to do. Let them consider what they propose to do—mess the whole business of the country abolishing the exchange. What is more to the point let others, let electors consider what they propose to do in this and other ways, and what they are likely to do in the way of vote-splitting. And after all vote-splitting is about all that the Democrats could achieve. Does the country want vote-splitting with such a serious issue before it? I think not. — I am, etc., D. SUTHERLAND.