THE WAIPUKURAU PRESS FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1935. THE ELECTION AND LIBERALISM.

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXX, Issue 272, 22 November 1935, Page 4

THE WAIPUKURAU PRESS FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1935. THE ELECTION AND LIBERALISM.

At the moment the indications are that in the absence of preferential voting the National Government will emerge from the General Election with the largest following, but not a clear majority of the House. In such circumstances the possibilities are very interesting, as the Leader of the Democrat Party is not, apparently, prepared to pledge the support of his followers to either the National or the Labour Party. It is obvious that, as in 1928, when the late Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph Ward gained a notable success as head of the United Party, criticism by the Government and the Labour Parties is being concentrated against the middle party, but in the circumstance of extensive votesplitting in many of the electorates the success of the new entrants is not likely to be comparable with that of seven years back. Something in the nature of a truce has apparently been called as between the old parties, with the leaders escaping somewhat lightly as to caustic criticism. Despite the vote-splitting between Democrats, the Country Party, and Independents in twenty-five instances, the most remarkable case of which is the appearance of a Democrat against Mr. McDougall, Member for Mataura, Mr. Hislop may be able, however, to bring off some surprises. Certain it is that there is much progressive Liberal ground open to tillage after having been allowed to lie fallow—or almost so—ever since the death of Mr. Secldon in 1906 and the combination of Reform-Labour forces at the 1911 elections, also United (erstwhile National, Liberal-Labour, and Liberal) and Reform (ex-Conserva-tive) in 1931, into the Coalition (now National) Government. Notable has been the “go-slow” land settlement attitude, and a reversal of several fundamental Liberal principles in taxation as well as labour laws. The financial burden has been transferred from the broadest shoulders—where the late Rt. Hon. W. F. Massey, as a square-dealing Reformer, had said it should be placed—to those of people on the lower rungs of the income ladder, with the result that a great body of Liberals have sought refuge in the Labour camp. Many others (like Mr. Atmore and Mrs. Knox Gilmer, a daughter of Mr. Seddon), are Independents, and a greater number still, we believe, are looking to the Democrat Party for a revival of liberalism, not bounded let us hope, by mere party limitations. Mr. Hislop will fail to reap the fruits of his present strenuous “sowing” campaign unless he recognises (also his lieutenants) that “Government of the people, by the people, for the people,” does not mean (as the Prime Minister appears to think) government only by a party (however good!), with ultraloyalty as the chief attribute. It is a handicap to democracy that under the generally accepted party system of control the dominant side commands its followers to “loyally” support all measures brought forward —ignoring the fact that loyalty to principles, and the electors, should rise superior to the demands of party expediency—which in turn could mean the dictatorship of one man as the Cabinet is logically as beholden to the Prime Minister, and his associate head, when there is such, as the members are to the Ministers. Speaking in his electorate recently, the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes referred to Independents as a serious danger for New Zealand.—Had he in mind Hon. W. Downie Stewart, Hon. Sir Charles Statham, Captain Rushworth, Hon. Sir Alexander Herdman, Messrs. Atmore, McDougall, Samuel and Harris, and in the past the Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph Ward (the only Liberal in 1925), Hon. Sir Thomas MacKenzie, Mr. F. J. Rolleston (afterwards a Minister), Hon. Geo. Witty, Colonel Geo. Mitchell, Messrs. F. Pirani, T. E. Taylor, Geo. Laurenson, H. G. Ell, H. D. Bedford, A. R. Atkinson, etc. ? The fact of the matter is that their power—not weakness (Mr Forbes said the Independents were a weakness) —is feared, because they support “popular measures” (in accordance with the will of the people). On the subject of independence Mrs. Knox Gilmer has this to say: “I see that Prime Minister has started to attack the Independents. That is how important we are. It is at me he is aiming. lam the Independent they are afraid of. I have been brought up in politics all my life. I have had it for breakfast, dinner and tea. I know the past history of the Prime Minister in politics, and the less he says about Independents the better. He had better leave me alone. lam an Independent because I cannot subscribe honestly to the policy of any of the parties.” Then we have a Conservative type of recruit to the cause of non-party independence. “It is my intention to support the National Government, but it is not my intention to be tied up as I have been for the past, four years,” said Mr. H. M. Campbell, M.P., official National candidate for Hawke’s Bay, in his address in Hastings, in the course of which he indicated that he had on occasions voted against his convictions. “I am going to have some freedom,” he said. “I’ll be a loyal supporter again this time,” he added, “but if the Government does things that I don’t like, I’ll vote against them. If you don’t like that, you can get someone else.”