11 OCTOBER 1924, Page 4

A WINNING PROGRAMME FOR UNIONISTS.

NO MORE CA' CANNY IN POLITICS.

THE experiment in Minority Government has come to its end, and a General Election is upon us. It will be fraught with as grave issues as any in our history. Therefore we shall concentrate our thoughts on these issues rather than upon the how or the why that has brought about the crisis.

The Labour Party has exactly diagnosed the inability of the Englishman to deal with the absolute and his dislike of a policy of pure negation. Therefore the Labour Party in its proposals, whatever their under- lying purpose, is always practical and specific. The Unionists must learn from Labour. They must avoid a policy of negation as they would the plague. They must meet scheme with scheme, practical proposal with prac- tical proposal. They must put forward an alternative policy which will be clear and believable, and not merely a disguised attempt to put spokes in the wheels of Labour. It is fatal in the case of a progressive people like ourselves to ask them to be content with things as they are, and to forbid them to explore new countries, or even new roads. The moment you say "Better not "to an Englishman, he is sure to become suspicious.

But the avoidance of negation is not in itself enough.

The Unionists must not offer plaything substitutes, but must make clear and firm proposals for amelioration.

We have of late watched with anxiety the tendency of the Unionist leaders to adopt a kind of policy of Ca' Canny in their political work. Just as the Trade Unionist worker is afraid for various reasons to put out his strength, so the Political Unionists appear to dread letting themselves go. They may begin to discuss some proposed reform with a certain amount of enthusiasm ; but very soon they become possessed by the thought that it will be dangerous to push the thing too far. It might injure somebody's vested interests or make some prominent magnate angry. Gradually, under the fire of criticism which is bound to be awakened by any bold project, they cool down and determine that they had better go slow until, as they put it, there are greater signs of popularity. They forget, in fact, that political leader- ship is like salesmanship. You cannot rest on meeting a want in the abstract. You must create a demand. You must use the compulsion of suggestion. You must stimu- late and excite. You must use the old seller's slogan,' You may not know it, but what you really want is more—" But we must not accuse the Unionist Party of not being specific and neglect to be specific ourselves. We will set out what we believe would be a policy worthy of the Unionist, anti-Socialistic Party, and would gain the confidence of those who though they do not at heart believe that the Socialist proposals of the Labour Party for putting society on a new,basis will succeed, are yet dissatisfied with things as they are, and who if no alternative is offered to them, may in despair give a blank cheque to Labour.

THE REFERENDUM.

The first duty of the Unionist Party is to prove them- selves a democratic party. They must make the country realize that their opponents are not in our sense a democratic party. They will not have the-Referendum at any price. The Labour view is that the people do not know what food is good for them. "But we know, and shall force them to eat it."

This is a vital issue. A democratic party must pledge- Itself to observe the will of the people, and the way for Unionists to make it clear that they mean to do this is to adopt the Referendum. There must be no Ca' Cannying here—no saying that the will of the majority ought to prevail, and then doing nothing to make it effective. It can be made effective only by giving the people a veto over the acts of the Legislature. When the will of the people has been pronounced, it is the duty of every good citizen to obey it, until he can get it changed by persuasion. We are all under bond in this respect ; but naturally we want to make sure in all matters of great importance what is the will of the people. "We will yield everything to your votes, but nothing to rifles and bombs, whether of the mob or of the reactionaries." That should be the first item of the social contract.

What have the Unionist Party done to give us this great insurance *against revolution ? Nothing, although they have had a plain warning in the fierce, almost panic opposition which the Labour Party has shown to the Referendum. For the Unionists to go to the country now without inscribing the Referendum on their banners would be one of the worst derelictions' of duty of which we can conceive. Surely they will not again fail to make our world safe for Democracy and liberty when the power to do so lies close at hand.

UNIVERSAL " ALL-IN " INSURANCE.

• The next proposal for placing this country not upon a new but upon an improved and ameliorated basis is concerned with the vital problem of unemployment and its attendant ills. The way to meet these ills is to adopt some form of universal compulsory and contribu- tory" All-in" Insurance, such as has been put before the country in the Broad Scheme. When that scheme was first launched the Unionist leaders apparently, and, no doubt, actually, took a great deal of interest in it. But they very soon let the kettle go off the boil. We do not say this because we think that the Broad Scheme is the one and only solution of the problem or has a monopoly of political virtue. It is quite possible that this practical scheme may be found to be imperfect. If it is so, let another be taken. What we complain cf is that the Unionist Party does not realize the vast importance of pushing on some scheme of the kind and so meeting, in a non-Socialistic way, the wishes of the workers. The ordinary working man has before him four principal anxieties, or, if you will, dreads. He dreads first, and above all things, unemployment, for he knows its deadening effect, and how it kills the body and soul of the worker. Next, the working man, even when well employed, dreads leaving a wife and family to charity, - whether of the individual or of the State. His third dread is sickness. His final dread is that of 'a miserable old age—a twilight existence of dependence and deprivation. At present we have a series of half measures and quarter measures, very chaotic, very expensive, very full of follies of omission and commission. Where the ground is not covered we have the Poor Law —a piece of Tudor Socialism patched with a kind of surly humanity some ninety-two years ago in order to prevent the extravagance and demoralization which have cursed the State without blessing the working- man, which have impaired his moral strength and inde- pendence, and yet have enabled him to reach his pittance only through a gate of shame and degradation.

Under a scheme Of properly applied Universal" All-In ". Insurance the Poor Law would disappear. The reasons that we have given are amply sufficient for getting rid of the Poor Law. But there is another reason, and a vital one. If we do not kill the Poor Law, the Poor Law will kill us. We have let, the Poor Law, often extra-legally, become a potent instrument for establishing Socialism. We now allow almost indis- criminate and unlimited outdoor relief to be given, and to be given in certain cases actually in supplement of the Dole. Up till now only a certain number of the Boards of Guardians have fallen into the hands of Labour, but more and more will gradually go that way, and we shall then get a system of Poor Law administra- tion which will waste the fields of commerce like a Upas tree. Universal " All-In " Insurance is our only way of escape from the Poor Law flood which will soon be upon us.

A LAND POLICY FOR UNIONISTS.

We have recently described in the Spectator what we believe should be the Land Policy of the Unionists= an immediate and active land policy, not merely a muddy mixture of twaddle, sentiment and Ca' Canny. Let our tenant cultivators be turned as rapidly as possible into owner cultivators, and let a large number of small- holdings be constructed out of the State, Church and Charity lands scattered throughout the country. Such a policy will be as strongly opposed by Labour as even will the policy of the Referendum and the policy of " All-In " Insurance. But, surely, that is the very reason why it must be pressed forward. It is a sign that it is going to cut the ground from under Labour's feet, and that is what every Unionist who means business ought to want. It is hardly too much to say that the land policy we advocate would in a very few years put up as absolute a barrier to Socialism and its sinister step- brother, Communism, as that which exists in France to-day and, if we may dare to be prophetic, as will soon be raised in Russia. Give us a million and a-half more land-owners, big, and especially small, holders, and we have got a lightning conductor for the social system of Individualism and Free Exchange which will prevent the building ever being demolished by the thunder- bolt of Socialism.

NATIONAL CREDIT.

Allied to the land policy which we advocate is the policy of lowering the cost of living for the working-man without lowering his wages, which Mr. Baldwin has fore- shadowed—a policy for cutting out the parasitic growths which come between the producer and the consumer. There are methods of doing this, through the use of State Credit, which we, though anti-Socialists, would be per- fectly willing to adopt.

We are not going to be frightened by accusations of yielding to. the enemy any more than a doctor is to be frightened out of giving quinine to a man suffering from ague because large doses of quinine in a healthy patient produce shivering fits. We believe the National Credit wisely used and without inflation (i.e., always with an eye upon the production of goods) may be fraught with immense benefit to the community—both to the owners of capital in the ordinary sense and to those who have their capital in their right arms. We would call new markets into existence, both in the old world and in the new, to redress the balance of trade. This can be done with- out resort to that attempt to obtain abundance through an artificial scarcity which is involved in Protection.

• STATE ACTION.

In the matter of State action the Unionists must not be timid, but they must be selective. There are certain things where, whether for good or evil (for good, as we think), mankind has admitted the benefits of State action. The first and most obvious of these is. concerned with transport and communication.. The State has already undertaken to provide the nerves and sinews of transport and communication by means Of roads and navigable tidal waters. Hitherto, however, it has not • done its work as boldly or as efficiently as it might. We want a system which will give us door-to-door transport by broad and straight roads throughout the length and breadth of the land. To go in for Ca' Canny over road- making because efficiency might hurt the railways or the canals is pure folly. The appetite for transport grows by what it feeds on. More and better roads will give us more, not less, railway and sea-borne traffic—especially' if we do what we ought to do and push ship canals wherever possible into the heart of the country. It will be a far better policy to spend sixty millions a year for several' years in improving the means of transport than to pay off in gold National Debt that was lent in paper. And here it should be noted that good roads are not al primrose path to Socialism. They are a direct support to Individualism. It is roads which can and will prevent us being held up by monopolistic Guilds or Trade Unions.

COAL CARBONIZATION.

Another field for State action is to be found in what 144 may call the broadcasting of power. Power, especially in the form of electricity, can be made, and should be made, an engine for supporting individualism in produe-: tion. But there is an extra reason for the State develop- ing the broadcasting of electrical power. It will work in with one of the greatest and most helpful forms of national sanitation. It is our duty to God and man to clean the heavens from the foul stains of smoke which now envelop them. Science has made it easy to do this through the new system of coal carbonization. We must forbid the consuming of raw coal. Once make that either a penal offence, or else a very expensive luxury, by means of taxation, and instead of turning the waste elements of coal into the air to pollute it we shall get a whole cornu- copia of extra benefits. By carbonizing the coal which we now burn without carbonization we can extract enough motor spirit, not merely to run all the internal-combustion engines that we now run with foreign oil, but enough to allow of a doubling of our consumption. Next it will give us a number of highly valuable gases and other chemical by-products. Finally, there will be the residual product of smokeless but warmth-giving fuel—a. kind of flaming and glorified coke. Incidentally, these good things will be provided for us at the pit's mouth. Also in many cases there will be the provision of that electric current which will help us all in the matter of light and driving power. That again is a piece of extended State action which is as legitimate from the anti-Socialist's point of view, as the provision of water.

In a future issue we shall dear with the other parts Of the programme which should be adopted by the Unionists, as, for example, the expansion of the Post Office, the proper handling of the National Debt, and the nationaliza- tion of the Liquor Trade, &c.

"Why are you so anxious to do all this ? " Because we believe the Socialist basis of society would prove a bed of Procrustes on which unhappy men and women would be broken by the million. "Then you arc content with the existing state of things ? " Heaven knows we are not. Amelioration is needed for half our popula- tion. All we want is to prevent the destruction of a system of society which, at any rate, does make it possible for the majority of human beings to get their daily bread into their mouths and some sort of houses over their heads, until we are sure that we have a better to put in its place. We do not believe that such an alternative is offered us by Socialism. It is a stone, not a loaf, that