NEW LEADERS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 86, Issue 229, 29 September 1942, Page 5

NEW LEADERS

BRITISH POLITICAL DILEMMA PARLIAMENT PERSONNEL ABLEST TALENT NOT YET REPRESENTED (Special Correspondent—N.Z.P.A.) London, Sept. 26. Beneath Britain’s war effort is growing restlessness at the political situation, based on the feeling not only that Parliament is not functioning as it should but that the work is not being done by the ablest people. The Economist, in an article entitled “The Political Dilemma,” which has been widely noted, declares that neither of the two large parties—Conservatives and Labour—evokes the slightest enthusiasm in the ranks of the people, while both so firmly command the machinery of politics that there is no prospect for a long time of dislodging either or both. “Between them,” it says, “these statements constitute the British political dilemma.” It adds: “The present Coalition is held together only by Mr. Churchill’s personality. He is party leader because he is Prime Minister, not Prime Minister because he is party leader. No very great enthusiasm is felt in the country for the Government, while Labour leaders as a whole have not made good Ministers. Therefore the public believes, almost subconsciously, that it must look for its super-men in the ranks of expelled Labourites or those who have never borne the Labour label. “Without much doubt, if the elector knew a better hole he would flock there in such numbers as to change the face of British politics, but there is no better hole,” states the article.

There is no brand-new party in sight, nor the slightest sign of the creation of one by the classical method of a split between the leaders of one or more of the old parties. Both of the present parties are “hampered by their own uncertainty of belief. Neither is in the least sure of what it stands for. The truth is that the old distinction between left and right has become almost meaningless? The real distinction which is emerging with even greater clarity is between the philosophy of the com- • •••••oooeooooo9&co>9so»««»e

munity serving the welfare of the individual and the philosophy that regards the community merely as a framework within which divergent interests can try their strength. This cleavage divides both parties equally. Neither can afford to take an open line on it; both, therefore, are dumb on the only real, continuing issue. “The basic explanation of the present position is not that politicians do not know what they stand for, but that nobody would believe them if they said so.” The Economist adds that to improve the personnel of politics a double approach is needed, first to discover and remove impediments which now prevent the best men and women from entering politics; secondly, when they are forthcoming to enable them to enter, “which requires willingness on the part of the two party machines to accept a radically different type of candidate.”

Finally it suggests that Britain might adopt the American device of the “primary,” which is an election held and supervised throughout the State, enabling members of each party to choose by ponfilar vote the, party’s candidate at the main election.

The Round Table says that, time and money are prospective candidates' first thoughts, thus the majority of members of the Commons are either people of independent means, trade unionists, or members of a limited list of professions. “These categories tend Io be over-represented,” it says. “Retired business men are common, but men actively in touch with modern industry are surprisingly few. Agriculture is represented by land owners, not land agents, working farmers, or agricultural labourers. The more powerful trade unions have numerically strong representation, but working men who do not belong to one of the unions are largely excluded. The great middle class, the backbone of the professions, local life, and the nation, are almost totally unrepresented, for members can neither afford the time nor the money.” It adds that it cannot be right that, as at present, one-tenth of the members of the House should be over 70 years old, one-quarter between 70 and 60, and barely oneeighth under 40.

Mr. Randolph recently suggested that the parties should aid themselves on a “class basis” and adopt a patriotic rather than a sectional standpoint in future, warning that unless they put their house in order a centre party would arise and sweep them awav. but comment which was drawn generally pooh-poohed the idea of a centre party. This strongly-running undercurrent will sooner or later come to the surface. Meanwhile it. is hoped that when it does it will produce new leaders, of which there is some bankruptcy at present.