Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. An organ of student opinion at Victoria University, Wellington. Vol. 23, No. 9. Wednesday, November 9, 1960

The Parties Compared

The Parties Compared

There are people who say that the two rival parties in New Zealand are so much alike that there's not much to choose between them. That, I think, is a very superficial view, and it calls for a measure of examination. Fundamentally, Labour stands pledged to Socialism; and National advances the supreme value of free enterprise and individual choice. Latterly, this distinction has become somewhat academic. During its present

term of office, Labour has paid lip service to Socialism but has done little if anything in the way of taking direct steps towards the attainment of its loudly proclaimed objective. Socialism has become, in effect, its theme for Sundays. Nevertheless, a good deal has been done by what one may call the indirect method, and it is argued that given something more than an uncertain and unsatisfied majority of two, the march towards State ownership and control could become faster and more direct.

There is a lot of evidence to support the view that Labour has been changing its coat to suit a change in the political climate. Space will permit me to refer to a few cases only.

* Socialists don't believe in big business because, they say, it exploits the workers in its pursuit of profits. But during the last three years, this so-called Socialist regime has been carrying on a most obvious flirtation with big business in the fields of oil, iron and steel, and aluminium.

In the field of finance, we can discover another Socialist move towards the right.

* Labour said for years that it was stoutly opposed to borrowing overseas, especially in the dollar market. National has always argued that in a young and developing country, reasonable overseas borrowing is not only wise and desirable, but necessary.

On its election to office in 1957, Labour easily forgot its pronouncements about borrowing and sent Mr Nordmeyer overseas—even to the "dollar money boodlers" of Wall Street—to see what he could raise in the way of loans: and only a few days ago, he said, his Government might have to do something along the same lines in the near future.

* Thirdly, Labour used to aver quite stoutly that it would not sell State houses. National believed in selling them, and did so, as part of its policy of home ownership. Labour, in office, has forgotten its pronouncements in opposition, and is selling State houses just as we did!

Space alone compels a curtailment of this theme. We of the National Party can fairly declare, however, that imitation is a very real form of political flattery.

Many of my readers will vote for the first time towards the end of this present year. It's not fun:

(Continued on Page 2).

page 2

(Continued from Page 1).

it's serious. With that vote, they will help to decide what tax burden their parents will have to carry. They will assist in fixing the burden they themselves will carry in respect of indirect taxes on petrol, tobacco, and lots of other things they commonly buy. They will assist in deciding whether the door of opportunity is to move towards "Open" or "Closed." They will be called upon to choose between present financial benefits with consequential burdens in taxation, and a wider, freer, and more self reliant future.

Truly, democratic government is a challenge to us all. It is a challenge to the political parties to place only what is best before us. It is a challenge to us to choose first and foremost that which is for the general good. It's a steep road but it was a New Zealander who first climbed Mount Everest.