The Press TUESDAY, JULY 5, 1938. National Party Instructions

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22445, 5 July 1938, Page 10

The Press TUESDAY, JULY 5, 1938. National Party Instructions

A correspondent whose letter is printed this morning requests us, when dealing with the subject of political tactics, not to forget certain “instructions of the National Party to its “speakers”; and he suggests that “a critical “examination of these instructions would be “a pleasant (and surprising) change” from some of our “ anti-Government ingenuities.” The instructions to which the correspondent refers are, of course, those quoted several times lately by members of the Government and attributed to a circular issued from the office of the National Party organisation. We have not seen the circular; but it is said to lay down the rule that “ the first duty of National Party speakers “is to oppose the “arguments, claims, and promises of the pres- “ ent Socialist Government.” There follows an emphatic “ Oppose! Oppose! Oppose! That is “the essential duty of Nationalist speakers.” Since our correspondent seems to suggest in his last sentence that the practice and the theory of “The Press” alike support this policy, it is necessary to say that we think it bad and foolish. But for his suggestion, we should not have thought it necessary to say so, for any attentive reader of “ The Press should know that, while opposing Some of the aims and many of the measures of the Government, we have frequently given it full or qualified support. Similarly, while generally supporting the aims and measures of the Coalition Government, we did not hesitate to criticise it and oppose, when that seemed necessary. We have tried always to make clear the reasons why we have objected and opposed; equally, to make clear the reasons why we have approved and supported; and we shall not trouble to justify this policy of discretionary support of a government, or discretionary opposition to a government, on any higher ground than that it is, rightly and usefully, a policy of discretion. The views of “The Press” are not changed by changes of government. It is not embarrassed if a government with which it is in general sympathy adopts or continues a measure which it has opposed under another Government; it continues to oppose. And if a government whose measures are generally objectionable to “ The “ Press ” happens to adopt one which is not, it costs “The Press” no pang or anxiety to welcome and support the act. It is another question whether the policy of “ Oppose! “ Oppose! Oppose!” is a good one for a political party in opposition. It is certainly the right and the duty of an opposition to test the government’s proposals with unsparing thoroughness, to expose every weakness and fallacy, and to resist every step in the passage of defective or bad. legislation. It might, indeed, be argued that the words quoted are no more than an energetic statement of this political truism. But we do not argue that. It is fairly clear that more meant. It is also quite certain that few members of the National Party will accept the extremes of this meaning, or follow them, or be content to see them followed. As much, no doubt, is to be said for the members of the Labour Party. It is interesting to note that, on the eve of the present session, the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Hamilton, after referring to the National Party’s objections to the impending social security legislation, said that other matters would be “ examined on their merits

We will support anything in the Government’s programme which we believe to be for the good of New Zealand; but if weaknesses can be detected it is our duty to hold them up to public examination and criticism. That is an exact statement of an opposition party’s responsibility. It is to be preferred, and to be trusted, before a paragraph of poor rhetoric in a circular which could not have t 1 V approval of the responsible leaders of. any political party.