POLITICAL POINTS.

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 15975, 18 November 1919, Page 6

POLITICAL POINTS.

The Gisborne Times, a Reform paper, says:—“ The political leader of Official Labour in N.Z., under whose banner all official Labour members must march obediently, was drawn from the same Australian school that produced Mr Hughes and Mr Ryan—great talkers and little else. We note that at least one distinctly Labour candidate maintains his revolt against such leadership, the present earnest and capable member for Wanganui still declining to accept Mr Holland as head of any party to which he would give allegiance. Is it not possible to find some more,men like him?

The Southland Times (a Reform journal) in a leader on Friday says :—“Sir Joseph Ward opened his campaign last evening with an excellent speech and an excellent meeting. He was in capi•’lM form, and his speech was clear, vigorous and effective.” Tire ai'ticle continues; “For the constructive work of the years following the war the country needs the services of the best men possible, irrespective of party, and Sir Joseph Ward is unquestionably one. If Sir Joseph Ward were lost to Parliament the whole Press of the country, Reform as well as Liberal, would refer to the loss as national and that the Reform party might well have given Sir Joseph Ward a clear run in his constituency.”

PROBLEMS OF WAR SOLVED. BOGUS “REFORM” CLAIM. “We have solved the problems of the war,” said Mr Massey grandiloquently to a meeting of admirers m Auckland. If that were true, we would gladly renounce “anti-Reform” and acclaim Mr Massey as the new political Messiah. But we are afraid this poor, misguided politician, who happens to occupy the place of a statesman, has not yet commenced to suspect the meaning of the problems of the war. There is one problem of the war New Zealand has yet lo solve, namely, that of soldiersettlement; and before Mr Massey and his friends- go further in their clumsy attempts to find a solution they should sit down quietly and read the reports of their own officers of the Lands Department. Urey will discover there, in terms as plain as any subordinate dare put them, the plainest ; efiticism of the present reckless policy and the most solemn warnings of its peril to the sol-dier-settlers and the taxpayers. Yet the Reform leader professes to have ‘‘solved the problems of the war”! —Lyttelton Times.

MR MASSEY TO BLAME. It is complained that “a party fight has been precipitated.” and an attempt is being made, both here and elsewhere, to make Sir Joseph Ward responsible for the possibility that Labour extremists may hold the balance of power in the new Parliament. Mr Massey, it is said, “would have welcomed overtures with a view to placing the Coalition cn a permanent and sounder basis,” hnt “Sir Joseph Ward's withdrawal prevented any such fusion.” We should say that if Mr Massey wished Sir Joseph Ward to remain in the Government after the war he should have made the approach, and we have Sir Joseph Ward's word for it that he was not invited to remain. . . . The charge

that Sir Joseph W,ard has plunged the country into party strife instead of combining with the Government to resist extreme Labour, really will not do. Reformers surely cannot be so pleased with the recford of the Coalition Government that they wish to see such _ a system retained indefinitely, with all its weaknesses or conflicting views in the Cabinet, resultant ineffectiveness, difficulty "of sheeting home responsibility, and absence" of a strong, organised and responsible Opposition.—Auckland Star. AGAINST BOTH REACTION AND * REVOLUTION.. t _ Liberalism in its most radical manifestations and in its most daring and courageous social experiments has never counternanced and never will countenance the doctrines of the Labour extremists. But Liberal tenets are very largely concerned with the betterment of the condition of the workers. The Liberal Party is the party of the "useful people" of this country, and it holds its clearly defined course in the scheme of things political, steering between the BeylLi of Conservative reaction on the one hand and the Ckarybdis of social revolution on the other. Those who tell a different story, whether they be Bolsheviks or those who want to use the Bolsheviks, cannot) expect credence in .New Zealand at the second time of asking. The first experience was sufficiently educative.—Lyttoltou Times. Let us assure our Reform friends that we have no moro sympathy with extreme Labour than thev. We detest the views of Mr Holland and Company on vital questions of the day, and we would be -just as grievad as our opponents if a party led by such mis-representatives of the working classes should dominate Parliament. But have Reformers realised that the prestige of the Labour group would be greatly enhanced if it wero the Opposition? Does it not remember that the fusion between Conservatives and Liberals in Australia gave Labour its chance in Federal politics? Liberals in New Zealand Realise quite well that if the parties combined, Liberalism Avould be clogged by conservatism, and thousands of voters among all classes who have vo.ted Liberal because they axe progressively-minded, would be ■tempted to turn to Labour for what the Fusion would not give them.—Auckland Star.