THE LIBERAL PARTY PROGRAMME
THE statement of policy, issued by Sir Herbert . Samuel on behalf of himself, his colleagues and the Liberal Party Organizations, is an attempt to compress into narrow compass a. complete account of their programme. Certain paragraphs which might easily hay.. e been expanded into chapters are necessarily bald in their brevity, and there are statements of prin- ciple which suffer the loss inevitable when a philosophy is boiled down into a sentence. But intelligent readers, for whom the whole vast literature of Liberalism is available for-exploration, will not be misled into mistaking brevity for glibness. Nor will they let themselves be prejudiced by the fact that the Liberal Party. today is very weak in Parliament, is* out of favour with the masses, and does not appear to be winning many recruits among the young. These all too obvious facts make it easy for cynics to scoff at the enthusiasm which ventures to offer itself as the cure for all the ills to which mankind is heir. But to others they make it all the more imperative to inquire what there is in Liberalism of value. to the modern world which makes so many of the best brains of the time adhere to it in spite of every conceivable discouragement.
Perhaps the first question which will occur to the student of this statement is—Does the Liberalism which it propounds represent a halfway house between Conservatism and Labour-Socialism, or is it something quite distinct from either, standing absolutely in its own right ? That is to say, might the subscribers to this doctrine be easily merged either in Left-wing Con- servatism or Right-wing Labour ? He will at once notice that some principles laid down in the programme would win assent from many Conservatives and many Socialists. - Liberals are not alone in urging resolute measures for the settlement of disputes by peaceful means, or in 'advocating the strongest possible champion- ship of the Covenant- of the League of Nations (with its provision for penalties against aggressors), the abolition of aggressive weapons on land, sea and air, and the climinition of the motive of private profit from the sale of arms. Nor are they alone in opposing threats against political liberties from the Right of the Con- servative Party and the Left of the Socialists. They are not the only advocates of measures to promote peace and co-operation in industry. And there are persons in all parties who would subscribe to their enlightened views about the planning of town and country, the preservation of beauty and culture in the national life, and provision of facilities for the use of leisure. The Liberal Party is the nucleus for humani- tarian convictions, the spearhead of the movement for " Peace, Liberty and Social JustiCe." And yet, if it stood for these great causes only, we might conceive of its membership existing within the ranks of other parties—a leaven, but not an entirely distinct force—a quasi-religious influence within the domain of politics.
But the programme shows us that this spirit, though essential to Liberalism, is only a part of its movement. We find here certain policies which are peculiarly and traditionally Liberal. Conspicuous . among them is Free Trade. These are certainly unfortunate days for those who would cling uncompromisingly to the letter of the unadulterated gospel of Free Trade, for the increasing. economic nationalism of other countries, the shrinkage of our foreign markets, and the possibility of dumping cheap products on our home markets have endangered the balance of trade and profitable home production. Some Liberals have perhaps damaged their cause, not by remaining convinced Free Traders—for almost all economists today are in principle Free Traders, and many. Conservatives are aware of the evils of Protection—but by insisting on the letter of their theory when circum- stances have made it unpractical in its entirety. We observe that the framers of the party programme have avoided that mistake. They concentrate on working for " general freedom of trade " and a general trade agree-, ment among all those nations which would be ready to trade freely, or with low tariffs, among themselves ; and of course they oppose subsidies. Free Trade, Propor- tional Representation and a democratic reform of the House of Lords are all peculiarly Liberal elements in the programme. But it has to be admitted that they arc not. elements which are likely at this moment to win many votes at an election.
But we are still only at the beginning of the constructive proposals in the policy, and it is a defect of the pamphlet, but not of the programme itself, that some of the measures which have vital relevance to present-day needs have not been thrown out into the prominence which they deserve. One of these has long stood on Liberal Party programmes, and though time has cast on it an odour of bygone sanctity, it is still one of those great social reforms which remain to this day unaccomplished. The taxation of the site values of land would have far-reaching effects in putting vast unearned increment values into the pocket of the State, to the advantage of the ratepayer and taxpayer. This is a policy which does not interest the Socialist, since his plan is to nationalize the land, and it can never easily be carried out by Conservatives owing to the resistance of landowners. And for other reasons there is no party which would be so likely to embark on an education policy satisfactory to educa- tionists as the Liberals, who dedare for the whole reorganization recommended in the Hadow Report.
The statement reiterates the belief of Liberals in national development through public works. There is one inconspicuous but supremely important plank in the programme which is being grievously neglected by the other parties today, and which, though it might be adopted by the National Government, could not be whole-heartedly promoted by any single party except the Liberal Party. We refer to the reorganization of the staple industries, or legislation to compel these industries to reorganize themselves. There is no greater hindrance to the recovery of trade in this country today. than the unwillingness of the coal-owners to accept even that minimum of reorganization which the Coal Reorganization Commission demands, of the iron and steel magnates to organize for the better and cheaper production which the ablest experts know to be necessary, and of the cotton manufacturers to co-operate for pro- duction and selling. The key industries of Great Britain are being killed through the incapacity of their mono-. past owners to act together and the unwillingness of the Government to bring the necessary pressure to bear on them. The Socialists, no doubt, would dispose of this problem by nationalizing industry. The Liberals declare their willingness to attack this tremendous task in the manner that would be open to a strong Government not committed to Socialism.
Do they, in effect, mean what they say ? Have they the courage and the fighting power to make this, a central problem in industry, into a central problem in politics ? What is wanted by the country is an active, determined policy directed to the drastic reconstruction of the great industries in a manner which will enable them to compete with the foreigner, and bring back labour to the factories and prosperity to the nation. Does the Liberal Party possess the man-power and the driving power to make this the issue that it should be in politics—reconstruction without revolution? If it does, it might regain its position as a determihing force in national politics. If it does not, its chances of effective work in the near future as an organized political party are small.
Previous page
