Commonwealth Leaders’ Meetings

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29909, 24 August 1962, Page 10

Commonwealth Leaders’ Meetings

The Government has acted sensibly in inviting the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nash) to remain in London during the period in which Common Market problems will be discussed at the Commonwealth Prime Ministers’ meeting. Mr Nash would in any case have been in London just before the meeting, having accepted Mr GaitskelFs invitation to Leaders of the Opposition of Commonwealth Parliaments to confer before the Prime Ministers’ conference. No question of extra travelling was involved, therefore, in the invitation to Mr Nash to be available in London for conference and consultation with Mr Holyoake during the Prime Ministers’ meeting, which in the circumstances is a useful extension of the practice of New Zealand Prime Ministers of keeping the Leader of the Opposition fully and promptly informed on important matters of external affairs. The practice acknowledges the desirability of policy on externa] affairs being above party politics.

Unhappily, the principle has not always worked out in practice; the conflict last year about New Zealand's entry to the International Monetary Fund is an example in point But as Mr Holyoake said in his statement to Parliament, in a matter which so gravely affects New Zealand's vital interests and upon which the country should be as united as possible, there may be considerable advan-

tage in enabling the Leader of the Opposition to be fully informed on all aspects of the negotiations. It is clearly understood that Mr Nash will not be a member of the New Zealand delegation, and will be free to form his own conclusions and to express his own views on Common Market questions. Nevertheless, Mr Nash should be able to serve the delegation and New Zealand well. As Minister of External Affairs in the last Labour Government, he had the advantage of discussions in Europe With leading figures in the Common Market nations; and, as he showed in a notable speech in the E.E.C. ' -bate in Parliament in July last year, he took a broader and more responsible attitude towards Britain’s projected membership of E.E.C. than some of his party colleagues. As one of the most respected elder statesmen of the Commonwealth (especially among the newer members) Mr Nash will not be without influence, even though not officially in the New Zealand delegation, Mr Holyoake has been wise and generous in seeking Mr Nash’s company in London; and the response of Mr Nash (for whom the role of an aloof and distant critic might have been both easier and politically more advantageous) has been just as generous. The nation will hope that what bears every appearance of being a felicitous arrangement will work well.