NATIONAL PARTY

Origin

The New Zealand National Party had its genesis in the decision, in September 1931, of the United Party, then the government (Right Hon. G. W. Forbes, Prime Minister), and the Reform Party (Right Hon. J. G. Coates, Leader and former Prime Minister, 1925–28), to form a coalition government. With a minority of members in the House, the United Government retained office precariously after the general election in 1928, when the Reform Government had been defeated. For some years the United Government had been supported in the House by the Labour Party, but the world-wide depression, with its stringent economy measures of the Government, resulted in the defection of Labour, and the United Party turned to their traditional rivals, Reform, for support.

In the general election in 1931, following shortly after the decision of the two parties to coalesce temporarily, the Coalition Government won no fewer than 51 seats. But thereafter its popularity began to decline rapidly while that of the Labour Opposition increased. In 1935 the Coalition Government decided to go to the country again as a united body, under the banner of the National Political Federation. The Federation's candidates sustained a crushing defeat, gaining only 19 seats; thenceforth, they were hopelessly outnumbered by the newly elected Labour Government, which won 53 seats (increased the next year to 55 by the admittance to the Labour Party of two Maori members). It was clear to the opposition parties that a major factor behind Labour's victory lay in the disunity of their opponents. Only by combining, it was contended, could they hope to regain office. At a meeting of the Dominion Executive of the National Political Federation, held in February 1936, it was decided to convene a conference at which the executive would recommend that a new party be formed. This conference (presided over by C. H. Weston, K.C.), was held in Wellington on 13 and 14 May 1936 and was addressed by the Right Hon. G. W. Forbes and the Right Hon. J. G. Coates, both of whom emphasised the gravity of the situation and the need for the greatest possible degree of unity and cooperation between non-Labour groups. The Federation's recommendation, that a new party be formed, was unanimously agreed to. Subsequently, after alternative names had been discussed, it was decided that the name “The New Zealand National Party” be adopted. The objectives of the party were stated to be: “To promote good citizenship and self-reliance; to combat communism and socialism; to maintain freedom of contract; to encourage private enterprise; to safeguard individual rights and the privilege of ownership; to oppose interference by the State in business, and State control of industry”. An entirely new form of organisation was drawn up and the rules of the new party were adopted. These have remained virtually unaltered.

Hopes that the new arrangement would attract wider public support were borne out by the results of the 1938 general election when National won 25 seats. In 1939 the party's activities were curtailed owing to the outbreak of war. The party organisation, however, remained in being throughout the war years. Two members of the Parliamentary Party, Coates and Hamilton, joined the War Cabinet at the invitation of the Government. The National Party's official stand was that political differences should be avoided for the duration of the war, and that both National and Labour should combine to form a coalition government. The Labour Party did not accept this proposal, and in 1943 another general election was held. From National's point of view the main issues were: (a) high taxation; (b) the direction of the war effort, and particularly Labour's unwillingness to form a coalition government for the duration of the war; (c) industrial unrest; (d) shortages, due at least in part to industrial unrest; and (e) controls which, National contended, were far too numerous and restrictive. Labour's socialist ventures were also strongly criticised, but, in the atmosphere prevailing at the time, it is doubtful whether National's charges had much impact. As a result of the election, the National Party's representation increased to 34, while Labour's declined to 45. Several marginal seats were saved for Labour by the soldiers' votes from overseas. Prior to the election (in 1940), the National Party had elected a new leader, S. G. (later Sir Sidney) Holland), with whom the party's eventual success is popularly associated. Holland remained the leader for 17 years, until his resignation from parliamentary life a few months before the general election in 1957.

Prior to the election in 1946, National won another seat (Raglan) in a by-election. This victory, however, was more than offset by a change in the electoral laws which brought about the abolition of the “country quota”, thereby reducing the number of rural and semi-rural electorates where National traditionally polled heavily. Nevertheless, National's representation increased this time to 38. The last of the Independents disappeared and, since 1946, all members in the House have belonged either to the National or the Labour Party.

As in the case of every election since 1935 (with the exception of 1951), there was no outstanding issue for National in the 1946 contest. The party's election policy was based on their 1943 manifesto, with modifications to allow for altered circumstances; more emphasis was given to the desirability of easing or abolishing a number of wartime controls. The advantages of home ownership as opposed to State tenancy were also strongly stressed. Moreover, National promised denationalisation of State industries and an end to industrial turmoil, particularly on the waterfront where strikes and “go-slow” actions had become commonplace.

During the war, for various reasons, the party's organisation, though not neglected, had not been improved. Following the cessation of hostilities in 1945 and the return to civilian life of thousands from the armed forces, the organisation soon expanded and was stronger than at any previous period in the history of the party. To this, in some measure, electoral gains made in 1946 could be ascribed. Three years later, in the general election held on 30 November, National won 46 seats and, for the first time since its establishment 13 years before, the party became the Government. Holland was Prime Minister, his deputy being K. J. Holyoake.

Following the industrial upheaval in New Zealand in 1951, when the Government's handling of the strike was severely criticised by its political opponents, Holland decided to dissolve Parliament to secure public endorsement of what the Government had done. This result was a victory for National, its representation in the House increasing to 50. In 1954 the party lost five seats, and in 1957, when it lost another six seats, it returned to the Opposition benches after eight years in office. But at the 1960 general election the party won 46 seats and so regained the Treasury benches. K. J. Holyoake, who became leader of the party and Prime Minister a few weeks prior to being defeated in the 1957 general election campaign, had acted as Leader of the Opposition. He now became Prime Minister, his deputy being the Hon. J. R. Marshall.

Present-day Objects

The objects of the party, as set out in its rules are:

To unite all men and women of good will who are unswervingly loyal to her Majesty the Queen, who realise the immense political, financial, commercial, and cultural advantages which accrue to New Zealand from close association with the other nations of the British Commonwealth, and who desire to promote the political and economic unity of the Commonwealth.

To maintain an efficient system of national defence.

To formulate and carry out policies designed to benefit the community as a whole, irrespective of national interests, particularly to bring about cooperation between the country and city interests, and between employers and employees.

To encourage the growth of private enterprise and healthy competition.

To encourage the development of individual effort and initiative and to take such steps as will grant the greatest possible measure of personal freedom and to foster the growth of good will between all sections of the community.

To encourage, wherever possible, for our mutual interest and safety, close contacts with Australia and other portions of our Commonwealth.

To arouse and maintain interest in political matters, to advocate the policy of the party, and to oppose subversive and other doctrines which are contrary to the principles and policy of the party.

To pursue a policy of progressive, social, and humanitarian legislation.

To encourage and assist the candidature for Parliament of able, honourable, and loyal supporters of the party.

To carry out educational and organising work in furtherance of the foregoing aims and objects.

To keep in touch with and, as may be deemed practicable, to cooperate with other organisations which have similar aims.

Support for the Party

The party has consistently affirmed that it strives to represent all sections of the community, and is strongly opposed to special privileges for any group or groups. Among its most active supporters and workers are many in the low-income bracket, including social security beneficiaries. It is beyond question, however, that the party is most strongly entrenched in rural and semi-rural areas. National holds practically all these seats, but also 13 which could be classified as purely urban. It has not held a Maori seat since 1943, when the late Sir Apirana Ngata was defeated for Eastern Maori.

In the general election in 1960, National contested 76 European seats and four Maori seats, winning 46 European seats but no Maori seats. The total vote for National was: European votes, 549,097; Maori votes, 7,792. Grand total, 556,889, or 47·59 per cent of valid votes cast. The Labour Party, which was the only other party to win seats in the House, polled 484,956 European votes and 23,090 Maori votes, a grand total of 508,056, or 43·42 per cent of valid votes cast. Labour won 30 European seats and four Maori seats. The present National Government has, therefore, a fairly comfortable majority of 12.

Party Organisation

Membership of the party is open to all citizens who subscribe to its principles. The membership fee is a minimum of 2s. 6d. per annum. At the present time, membership totals over 200,000. The party is strongly organised, having over 1,300 branches situated in all parts of the country. With but a few exceptions, all offices in the party are elective, and this includes candidature for parliamentary honours.

The party is organised as a pyramid. At the base are the branches, each with a membership of 20 or more. These elect representatives to electorate committees, though in city electorates the divisional committees may permit electorate committees to be elected at a general meeting of members. There are five semi-autonomous divisions (Auckland, South Auckland, Wellington, Canterbury, and Otago-Southland). Divisional committees comprise representatives elected by each electorate committee in the divisional area, and divisional executives are appointed by their respective committees. The Dominion council of about 50 comprises the president, the leader, the vice-presidents, the Dominion treasurer, all divisional chairmen, and such number of members elected by annual meetings of the divisions on the basis of one member for every four electorates, or part of four, within their respective boundaries, and five members elected by the National members of Parliament. The Dominion executive of about 20 is elected by the Dominion council from its number. The Dominion conference is held annually and comprises four delegates from each electorate, the members of the Dominion council, and those members of Parliament who are members of the party. The president and vice-presidents are elected at the annual Dominion conference. Branch members are eligible for nomination for selection as the official candidate for Parliament, and are eligible for selection as a representative of the branch on the selection committee to select the official candidate. The party constitution also makes special provision for representation by women's and junior sections. Party headquarters, consisting of the general director and the research and publicity officers, together with their respective assistants, are situated in Wellington. The party publishes a monthly newspaper, Freedom.

by Martin Joseph Silvester Nestor, M.COM., Chief Research Officer, New Zealand National Party, Wellington.

• Constitution and Rules of the New Zealand National Party (1951)
• Handbook on Organisation, New Zealand National Party, Dominion Headquarters, (1949).

“RED” FEDERATION OF LABOUR

Following the Blackball coal miners' strike of February-March 1908, a conference of West Coast miners' unions met in Greymouth in August 1908 to form a New Zealand Federation of Miners. Robert Semple was elected president and Patrick Hickey secretary. The objects and preamble were copied largely from those of the Western Federation of Miners and the Industrial Workers of the World, two radical American organisations. Affirming the class struggle, they were a direct challenge to the existing industrial arbitration legislation. In 1909 the Miners' Federation changed its name to New Zealand Federation of Labour. It became popularly known as the “Red” Federation and its members as Red Feds. Besides coal and gold miners, the federation gained the affiliation of most waterside unions, as well as general labourers', shearers', and other, mainly unskilled, unions. By 1912 it united a quarter of New Zealand's organised workers. Its weekly journal, the Maoriland Worker, reached a circulation of 10,000 early in 1913.

The “Red” Federation conducted a number of industrial disputes and, by aggressive action, was able to gain important concessions for its members. It suffered its first setback in the Auckland General Labourers' dispute of 1912, and was again defeated in the bitter Waihi gold miners' strike later that year.

In July 1913 the federation joined forces with several more moderate unions to become the United Federation of Labour. It suffered a crushing defeat in the nationwide waterfront strike of October 1913. Membership declined, but a skeleton organisation was kept in existence until 1920, to be succeeded by the New Zealand Alliance of Labour. The leaders of the “Red” Federation, Semple, Webb, Fraser, Savage, Parry, and Armstrong, later entered Parliament and became members of the first Labour Government in 1935.

by Herbert Otto Roth, B.A., DIP.N.Z.L.S., Deputy Librarian, University of Auckland.

• “Red” Fed Memoirs, Hickey, P. H. (1925)
• The Tragic Story of the Waihi Strike, Holland, H. E. (et. al.) (1913).

REFORM PARTY

Origin

The Reform Party, the full title of which was “the New Zealand Political Reform League”, was a conservative body, but that term must be understood in the light of our history and environment. Right-wing organisations which preceded the N.Z.P.R.L. were the Political Reform Associations (1887), the National Association (1891–99), and the Auckland Electoral League (1902). In spite of the poor prospects for a successful attack on Seddon's strongly entrenched Liberal Party, a Political Reform League was formed in Christchurch in June 1905, mainly through the work of W. J. (later Sir William) Polson and of Charles Lewis who was probably responsible for reviving the “Reform” label of 1887. P.R.L.s sprang up in other centres, and Massey accepted their support for the 1905 election. The Christchurch group produced a few numbers of the Reformer, but as Massey was a strong critic of Seddon's “Tammany machine”, he could hardly set up a full-scale organisation in competition. The 1908 election result encouraged him to put forward the Opposition as an alternative government, and he announced the Reform Party in February 1909, borrowing the title from the P.R.L.s. The name was not new, nor did it commit Massey to any new policy; but it helped to efface the “Conservative” name and party-image fastened on him by the Liberals. By the 1911 election, the parliamentary party and the P.R.L.s were virtually merged at the local level, but the N.Z.P.R.L. was not constituted until its first conference (4–5 August 1912), held after Massey had come into office. The chief architect of the 1912 Constitution was E. F. Hemingway of Patea, who had been a member of the British Primrose League. The objects of the N.Z.P.R.L. were, briefly, to correct the alleged maladministration of the Liberals and to put forward and support parliamentary candidates. The subscription was a minimum of 2s. 6d. There were to be branches of the League in all electorates, which were grouped in five divisions (October 1913). The leader of the parliamentary party was to be president of the League. He presided over the executive of 15 (1913), and its “literary” (policy and propaganda) committee; he convened conferences; he approved the appointment of organisers (five in 1914), and gave them special instructions. No procedure was laid down for the selection of candidates. Massey made little secret of his determination to keep the League to canvassing and financial functions. An attempt in 1912 to change the name to the N.Z. Democratic League failed.

Reorganisation

The League made good headway in preparing for the election of 1914, but the political truce at the outbreak of war, followed by the formation of the National Government (August 1915), led to its gradual falling apart. During the Prime Minister's absence in Europe, 1918–19, a “Progressive Reform” cave, of vaguely leftward tendencies, developed among his backbenchers. Massey turned aside the threat by taking three of the leaders into his Cabinet in 1920. By the election of 1919, Reform was, in effect, Massey's personal following, his supporters standing as “Independent Reform”, not as League candidates. He relied on his own mana, the wealth of Sir Walter Buchanan and others, and the services of E. A. James, twice General Secretary of the League, and editor of the Reform journals, Light and Liberty (1913–14) and the Newsletter (1920–28). In spite of a provisional rule (1920) that candidates should be chosen by the electorates and approved by the President, procedure remained varied, and Massey had to cope (not always successfully) with local quarrels. From at least 1915, Reform-Liberal fusion had been advocated. After the stalemate election of 1922, protracted negotiations were carried on with the weakened Liberals, but Massey was lukewarm, and Coates, confident of Reform victory, broke them off in 1925. In 1923 Massey had set up an Organisation Committee under A. D. McLeod. Five organisers were appointed, including A. E. Davy, the most controversial figure in Reform history.

On Massey's death, in 1925, Davy organised a spectacular press campaign for Coates, which was widely believed to have paved the way for the Reform victory with 54 seats, the party's peak of power. Coates set out to revitalise the League, which held a full conference in 1926, the first since 1914. The constitution was revised to ensure more vigorous branches, but many of the old habits remained. By 1927–28 the Reform Party itself was in danger, with Coates as the storm-centre. He was criticised on the one hand by businessmen for his “socialism”, and on the other by debt-ridden farmers for his alleged deference to stock and station agencies, and financial institutions. A businessmen's political conference in November 1927 was the beginning of the end for Reform. A “1928 Committee” was formed to demand “less government in business” from Coates. Davy, who had fallen out with Coates, organised the United Party, which took enough votes from Reform to become a minority government. The League then purged its membership lists, and achieved its highest level of organisation in preparation for a comeback in 1931. However, powerful Reform and ex-Reform leaders forced the reluctant Coates into coalition with Forbes at the eleventh hour (September 1931). The leaders claimed that this was not a union of parties, but the League was instructed to follow Cabinet leadership. Though some branches were still active as late as 1933, the growing strength of Labour, and the threat of the Democrat Party (with Davy as organiser) forced Reform and United together in 1935 in the National Political Federation, to prepare for the coming election. The N.Z.P.R.L. was formally dissolved in 1936, and virtually absorbed into the National Party.

Political Philosophy

Reform was not a party of historically-minded “Conservatives”, but a political defence for “men in possession” in a new country. It was not a party of doctrine, unless “anti-socialism” and Massey's mixture of practical and mystical imperialism can be called doctrine. The nearest approach to a Reform political philosophy is found in the Dominion editorials of Charles Earle, who appealed to the “true Liberalism” of Bentham and Mill, only occasionally to Burke, and most of all to the individualism of Herbert Spencer. In the 1880s “reform” had meant reducing or ceasing borrowing, and cutting down the civil service and State expenditure. By the 1900s it signified to many the ending of Seddon's “Tammanyism” and, in particular, checking the alleged favouritism to Catholics in the civil service. Massey hoped to win radical “reformers” into his Reform Party, but the basic general position of Reform was “anti-socialism”, and resistance to the rising menace of Labour. Massey had long since promised to respect Liberal legislation, and had given up his old opposition to Liberal protection and borrowing. Hence, he could attract Liberal votes in town and country, and his “freehold” banner rallied New Zealand's strong individualism, particularly as expressed in the Farmers' Union, which had been won to full support of Reform by 1911. Reform of the Legislative Council and of the civil service had less popular appeal. The party in 1911 did not offer a “conservative revolution”, but cleaner and more efficient administration of existing laws, and firmer resistance to socialism than Ward was likely to undertake. Though there were some limited local alliances with Labour against Liberal in 1911, Reform revealed itself as conservative in the strikes of 1912–13, probably gaining more support than it lost by Massey's firm action.

During the war and post-war period, controversy raged round the Protestant Political Association, which conducted a vitriolic anti-Catholic and anti-Labour campaign. Massey, an Ulster Orangeman, denied any organic connection between Reform and the P.P.A., but the latter endorsed practically only Reform candidates in 1919 and 1922, and included some prominent Reformers in its ranks. In the same years, Massey moved towards a more fervid and “British” imperialism, the obverse of which was “anti-Bolshevism”. Reform virtually claimed to be the only loyal party. Coates carried on much of Massey's imperialism, which headed the party's 1929 objectives. This latter list, which was never effectively put forward, would have committed Reform to a more radical land and social policy, and covered much of the same ground then taken by Labour. Reform however, was, in essentials a party of conservative sectional interests. Those interests were held together in prosperity and by common fear of Labour, but clashed in depression. The party rose to power primarily on the growing rural conservatism of the North Island, particularly Auckland. In the creeping depression of the 1920s, Coates found he could no longer reconcile the rural and urban interests in his party. Businessmen claimed that Coates was using the State to save farmers and to destroy urban private enterprise, while some dairy farmers looked to the more radical Country Party and even the Labour Party for bolder credit policies. In 1928 Reform lost conservative votes in both city and country to United, and could not maintain its claim to be the one authentic anti-Labour party. Yet, in spite of the apparent landslide of 1925, Reform had never succeeded in gaining a majority of electoral votes, and was thus never truly a majority party. The following figures (from Lipson's Politics of Equality, pp. 187–8) which relate to European seats only, demonstrate the electoral fortunes of Opposition (1905–08) and Reform (1911–28):

by William James Gardner, M.A., Senior Lecturer, History Department, University of Canterbury.

• Rise of the Reform Party, Webb, L. C. (1928)
• Ends and Means in New Zealand Politics, Chapman, R. M. (ed.) (1961)
• The Reformer (1905)
• Light and Liberty (1913–14)
• The Newsletter (1920–28)
• Political Science, Vol. 13, Nos. 1 and 2 (1961).

SOCIAL CREDIT POLITICAL LEAGUE

The first noteworthy proponent of Social Credit in New Zealand was H. M. Rushworth, Country Party Member of the House of Representatives for the Bay of Islands from 1928 to 1938. He was not Parliamentary representative of any Social Credit organisation but because he brought forward in the House the following major Social Credit arguments, namely, that credit and the monetary system should be controlled by the people through the Government; that a gap existed between purchasing power and production costs; that the gap could be bridged by the issue of credit; and that Parliamentary party control should not be unduly rigid, Rushworth may be considered a forerunner of the New Zealand Social Credit Political League.

The New Zealand Social Credit Association is prevented by its constitution from being a political organisation. But many members felt that the principles of Social Credit could best be put into practice by the formation of a political party. Thus, in May 1953, the New Zealand Social Credit Political League was formed, the first office holders being M. J. Hayes (President), C. W. Elvidge (Vice-President), R. G. Young (Secretary), and F. C. Jordan, S. H. C. Jones, A. J. Pascoe, W. B. Owen, A. R. Mackay, and Miss R. S. Andrew (members). The League contested 79 seats in the 1954 Parliamentary elections, polling 124,372 votes, 11·31 per cent of all votes cast, but did not win a seat. The points of election policy were similar to those put forward by Rushworth 20 years previously, but they also included pledges to reduce taxation progressively which would lead to falling costs of production and an increase in the purchasing power of incomes; to abolish social security tax without reducing benefits; to support private enterprise; and to enact legislation to eliminate unfair trade practices. In both the 1957 and 1960 Parliamentary elections all seats were unsuccessfully contested, 83,498 votes, 7·21 per cent of the total, being cast in 1957 and 100,905, or 8·62 per cent, in 1960. In the 1963 election 95,176 votes were cast for Social Credit candidates, which was 7·94 of the total votes cast.

The party leader for the 1954 and 1957 elections was W. B. Owen, whose 1957 policy was an elaboration of that of 1954. A national monetary authority to ensure a balance between production and income was to be set up; bureaucratic controls were to be reduced to a minimum; farming was to be encouraged; school classes were to be reduced; health services were to be improved and preventive medicine encouraged; and a Second Chamber was to be established. In May 1960 P. H. Matthews was elected party leader and his 1960 election policy included proposals to introduce a Bill of Rights limiting the powers of Government and safeguarding the rights of the individual; to allow pensioners to travel free on Government-owned services outside holiday periods; to rehabilitate the coal industry; to rationalise retail trading hours; and to hold a comprehensive referendum on the liquor licensing question.

The League has practically no central control. The electorates are autonomous and are able to use any methods and propagate any policy they wish, provided it is not repugnant to the policies approved by the League's annual conference. Election candidates are approved by regional executives and are referred to the Dominion Council for formal approval which is withheld only if the candidate is of doubtful character or a member of another party.

From December 1954 to August 1955 the League issued its own journal, the New Zealand Social Credit News, and from August 1959 it has issued the New Zealand Guardian. League news is now included in the New Zealand Social Crediter, which is issued by the New Zealand Social Credit Association.

The New Zealand Social Credit Political League has its largest following in the farming areas of Northland, Taranaki, and Bay of Plenty, and in Wanganui, and is supported by farmers, small-business men, and others in the medium-income group who are generally dissatisfied with Labour and National governments.

by John Sidney Gully, M.A., DIP.N.Z.L.S., Assistant Chief Librarian, General Assembly Library, Wellington.

• Political Science, Mar 1955, “The New Zealand Social Credit Political League”, Penfold, W. J.
• Dominion, 20 Jul 1933, 1 Oct 1957, 3 Nov 1960
• Evening Post, 20 May 1953, 11 Sep 1954, 15 Oct 1954.

SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY

After the collapse of the Waihi strike in 1912, the Labour leaders of the day realised that, for as long as the various industrial organisations lacked unified direction, their strike policy was doomed to failure. Accordingly, in January 1913, the “Red” Federation of Labour invited representatives from all trade unions – as well as the United Labour Party, the Socialist Party, and the Industrial Workers of the World (I.W.W.) – to a “unity” conference in Wellington. This conference recommended that the political and industrial wings should be separated and central organisations established for each. On 1 July 1913 the Unity Congress, which set up the United Federation of Labour and the Social Democratic Party, opened in Wellington. At this meeting the militant leaders made a concerted effort to conciliate the moderates, and showed themselves prepared to compromise on many fundamental issues. Among the aims of the Social Democratic Party were provisions that “strikes should be effective when used, and under central control”. A difference of opinion arose over this, and the right-wing moderates – including such notables as Sir George Fowlds, D. McLaren, M.P., Hon. J. T. Paul, and W. A. Veitch, M.P.– withdrew and continued the United Labour Party. Shortly after the congress, the United Federation of Labour and Social Democratic Party became involved in the 1913 strike and three Social Democratic Party leaders, including H. E. Holland, were gaoled. Despite this unpromising beginning, six “Labour” members were returned to Parliament in the 1914 general elections. These were J. McCombs and P. C. Webb (S.D.P.); A. H. Hindmarsh, W. A. Veitch, and A. Walker (U.L.P.); and J. Payne (Independent). At the same time “Labour” candidates polled nearly 10 per cent of the total votes cast.

Early in the 1915 session the “Labour” members of Parliament formed an organised group in the House under Hindmarsh's leadership. In August, when Massey formed his Liberal-Reform coalition, he invited Hindmarsh's group to join. The “Labour” members declined and, as a result, became the official Opposition in the House. In July 1916, on behalf of the Social Democratic Party, Peter Fraser invited representatives of the United Federation of Labour, the Labour Representation Committees, and the parliamentary group to the conference which formed the New Zealand Labour Party.

by Bernard John Foster, M.A., Research Officer, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

• The Rise of New Zealand Labour, Brown, B. M. (1962)
• Humanism in Politics, Paul, J. T. (1946)
• Peter Fraser, Thorn, J. (1952)
• Harry Holland – Militant Socialist, O'Farrell, P. J. (1964).

SOCIALIST (N.Z.) PARTY

The first socialist groups in New Zealand were formed in the late eighteen-nineties – Fabian Societies in Dunedin and Christchurch, a Socialist Church in Christchurch, and a Clarion Club and, later, a Socialist League in Wellington. These were primarily propaganda organisations, seeking to educate their members and the public at large by means of lectures, public meetings, and journals.

A political party, the New Zealand Socialist Party, was not formed until July 1901, following the arrival of almost 200 British socialists, the so-called “Clarion Settlers”, led by W. R. Ranstead. Branches of the new party were set up in Wellington, Auckland, and Christchurch. In January 1902 Tom Mann, the British Labour leader, arrived in Wellington and was appointed national organiser of the Socialist Party. Under Mann's guidance the party combined educational work on the long-term aims of socialism with practical work for immediate reforms. In 1903, however, after Mann had left for Australia, a more uncompromising group led by Robert Hogg gained control of the Socialist Party and introduced a policy of “Revolution, not Reform”. Sterile theoretical discussions replaced electoral activity and work in the trade unions. Membership fell and branches collapsed, leaving only a small nucleus in Wellington to keep the party alive. In 1907–08 the growing industrial unrest, which led to the first strikes in defiance of the Arbitration Court, brought with it a revival of the Socialist Party. New branches were formed among the West Coast miners, at Huntly, Waihi, and elsewhere. At the party's first national congress, in April 1908, a membership of 3,000 was claimed. Socialists were among the leaders of the new “Red” Federation of Labour and the two organisations, after 1911, shared their national organ, the Maoriland Worker.

Already in 1903 the Socialist Party had contested municipal elections in Wellington and Auckland and had gained a seat on the Wellington City Council. In 1911 the first socialist entered Parliament – John Robertson who won Otaki in the second ballot. The borough of Runanga had a socialist Mayor while in other mining townships party members served on councils and school committees. Despite these successes, socialist participation in elections remained half-hearted. The party never resolved the conflict between the moderates who were anxious to work for immediate reforms through Parliament, local bodies, and trade unions, and the so-called “impossibilists” who would accept nothing short of full socialism and “bloody revolution”.

The parting of the ways came in July 1913, when the Labour Unity Congress formed a Social Democratic Party. Socialists were invited to join the new party and the great majority of them heeded the call. H. E. Holland, recently arrived from Australia, P. Fraser and M. J. Savage, leaders of the Auckland branch, F. R. Cooke from Christchurch, and P. C. Webb were among the prominent socialists who joined the Social Democratic Party. The Wellington branch alone refused to disband and maintained its old name and separate identity. During the war years, members of this branch supported the Conscription Repeal League which conducted a Free Speech campaign in 1916–17. After the war the remaining members of the branch joined in the negotiations which led to the formation of the New Zealand Communist Party in 1920–21.

A short-lived attempt to revive the Socialist Party was made in Christchurch in the early thirties. The bulk of socialists, however, remained in the Labour Party which had taken over the old Socialist Party objective of “the socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange”. Many of them reached high office in Cabinet, Parliament, and the Labour Party itself.

by Herbert Otto Roth, B.A., DIP.N.Z.L.S., Deputy Librarian, University of Auckland.

• Political Science, Mar 1957, The New Zealand Socialist Party, Roth, H.

UNITED PARTY

The United Party, the successor to the Liberal Party, was formed in 1927 and, after a surprising success in the general election in the following year, it formed a Government under the veteran Sir Joseph Ward. The party later joined the Reform Party in the Coalition which governed New Zealand from 1931 to 1935.

The Liberal Party of the 1920s was demoralised and disunited following a split after 1925 between the Nationalists, under G. W. Forbes, and a small group of Liberals, under W. A. Veitch. After the 1925 election the two groups held only 11 seats. Efforts to revive the moribund party were abortive until in November 1927 the Nationalists joined the United New Zealand Political Organisation which had been set up a few months earlier by A. E. Davy, the brilliant organiser who had worked for the Reform Party in 1925. All Liberal forces joined at a unity conference at Auckland in September 1928 to form the United Party. Sir Joseph Ward, the former Liberal Prime Minister who had stood aloof from the party throughout the twenties, became the leader of the new party.

The United Party was created at a time when there was considerable dissatisfaction with the Reform Government of Gordon Coates and its election campaign was skilfully managed by A. E. Davy to capitalise on this feeling to the best advantage. The United Party attacked the Government's interference with “free enterprise”, reflecting the dislike felt by urban business for the Government's interventions in the economy on behalf of farming interests. The party also caught the public imagination with its proposal to borrow £70 million within a year for use in national development, although Ward later appeared to have made this promise rather rashly. Ward himself was an asset to the party, being a revered political veteran and still an effective campaigner. The election results, which were a severe setback for Reform, were: Reform, 27 seats; United, 25 seats; Labour, 19 seats; and Independent, five seats.

United, which was supported by Labour and the Independents, formed a government with Ward as Prime Minister on 10 December 1928. In spite of its high promises, the party was almost completely inactive in office. The lavish borrowing proposals were quickly shelved, and they could not possibly have been carried out in the deteriorating economic situation. Public works were curtailed during 1929 and unemployment increased. The situation was aggravated by the ineffectiveness of the Cabinet, five members of which had not even sat in Parliament before. Ward himself was failing and retired in May 1930, dying two months later. The leadership passed to G. W. Forbes and the Government drifted on for a year, finally joining in a Coalition with Reform in September 1931 in the face of the grave economic situation and after a series of by-elections which had disastrous results for United. The party finally lost its identity in a complete merger with Reform in May 1935.

The success of the United Party in 1928 was due primarily to the dissatisfaction felt by the urban business community at the increasing intervention in the economy by the Reform Government in the interests of its farming supporters. A particularly powerful business group in Auckland, known as the “Kelly gang”, shifted its support from Reform to United in 1928. This contributed substantially to United's gain of five Auckland seats in 1928, where National had won none in 1925. For such groups the United Party provided a safe alternative to Reform without encouraging the still suspect Labour Party. The result was that the United Party was able briefly to recast the old urban-rural alliance which had kept the Liberals in power from 1890 to 1911, and which had been split during the twenties by the Reform Government's economic policies. The economic conditions necessary for the success of Liberal economic policies were, however, no longer in existence, and the United Party had only a brief hour of success before it vanished into political oblivion.

by John Richard Sinclair Daniels, M.A., Local Government Branch, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.