REFORM’S OFFER

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 188, 7 May 1931, Page 11

REFORM’S OFFER

Mr, Forbes to Consider

QUESTION FOR PARTY

Returning from South

By Telegraph—Press Association.

Christchurch, May 6. The Prime Minister, the Right Hon. G. W. Forbes, who was at his home at Cheviot this morning, said he was not yet in a position to make a statement ■ regarding the Right Hon. J. G. Coates s action in declining the Governments offer for the formation of a National Party Mr Forbes said that the reply from the Leader of the Opposition required consideration and possibly a conference with the members of his party. Mr. Forbes is a passenger by the ferry, and will arrive in Wellington to-day. editorial views Need for Harmony ' DIFFICULTIES FACED Editorial views from the other_wntres reflect varied opinions on the reply or Mr. Coates to the fusion proposal. _ “A refusal of the suggestion to amal gamate and form a fusion party, and an offer of co-operation to conduct the business of the country are the, main features of the statement issued by the Leader of the Opposition in a" B ™** o the Prime Minister, says the New Zea land Herald” (Reform),. It is courteous and moderate, yet explicit and uncompromising. It puts into proper perspective the position as between too United and Reform Barties- the .™ le the Labour Party, and the rights o the people. Analysed and set forth in this-fashion, tEe course the Prime Minister proposed appears far less appropriate, or, indeed, inevitable, than was claimed by its ardent eulogists when it was made public. Mr. Coates leaves it perfectly clear that there is no such singleness of aim, purpose, and feeling between the two parties as would be essential to fusion in the proper sense. If there were it would not need to be effected by public invitation and acceptance. He was perfectly justified m his reminder that common animosity to himself and his party formed a bond which linked the United. Party with those who gave it unlimited support through two sessions. . . The elements of the proposed new organisation would be as unharmonious as he forecasts. Fusion in those circumstances would leave the last state worse than the first. ’ Fundamental Differences. “Principles still count—or should count —in polities,” says the Auckland Star (United), “and it is refreshing to read an appeal to them by a party leader. Stability is needed in our politics sufficient to enable the urgent business of the country to be done, but stability may become a barren marking of time. A weakness of such a coalition is that the Conservatives and Liberals cannot compose their fundamental differences. On the land question, for example, there wou d certainly be a sharp and even fatal difference of opinion between the Reform and United parties. Moreover, any union of parties that the publie deemed to be a sacrificing of principles for the Purpose of keeping Labour out of office —and the public is not easily deceived in such matters—would recoil against those , who brought it about. ... A large section of Reform is very much afraid of Labour, and on that. account has been urging union with the United Party. These followers will be dissatisfied with their leader’s rejection." z Government Will Carry On. The Christchurch “Press” (Reform) states :■ —“No one can have supposed after the first forty-eight hours that the Prime Minister’s offer would be accepted, and now it has been formally rejected the only really interesting question is the effect on Mr. ' Forbes himself. In ordinary circumstances a leader so placed would resign, but the situation not only of the Government but of the Opposition, and, indeed, the whole country, is altogether extraordinary, and in any case the Opposition offers assistance in carrying on. It is to be expected, therefore, that the Government will carry on, and if it does it has not only the Reform Party’s general promise to rely on that it will ‘support such measures of economy and finance as the present crisis demands, but the special and distinctly interesting offer of ‘a small committee of Reform members to confer with Mr. Forbes’s Ministers before legislation is introduccd.’ ” ' Commenting editorially under the heading “Mr. Coates Declines,” the Chidntchurch “Times” (United) says: “Mr. Coates declares that the Reformers ‘refuse to destroy theanselves.’ Unless we have wholly mistaken the temper of the constituencies, that is precisely what thev have done.” . ' The “Times” concludes: “This refusal has enormously strengthened Mr. Forbes s position, and incidentally it has demonstrated how empty is the claim of Reform to place the interests of tihe country before those of party. Mr. Forbes must go ahead now with his job. He has the country behind him, and if the Reformers decline to fall into line, so much the worse for them.” Reply Criticised.

“We have not heard that the Reform Party as a while has been consulted on the subject,” says ■ the “Otago Daily Times” (Reform). Members of the Reform Party in Parliament do not constitute the’party. If it is by them that' the Prime Minister’s proposal has been rejected it is to be feared that they have done n serious disservice to Reform as a whole. The effect which rejection may have on the Reform Party is, however, oi far less moment than the effect on the country. It means not only that the system of minority Government which the Dominion has suffered since the last general election will .he continued during the ensuing session of Parliament, but also that in all probability it will be continued in the Parliament to be elected towards the end of the year. The Reform Party has disregarded a great opportunity. and in doinr so it will have wounded the feelings of, and possibly have estranged, large numbers of electors who have accorded to it their warm support in the past, but it will have afforded a vast amount of satisfaction to Mr. Holland and his friends. They it is who stand to gain through the Reform Party’s decision. SHOULD GET TOGETHER Sir James Alien’s View Dominion Special Service Duneditb May 6. Sir James Allen, M.L.C., said in an interview that he thought the Reform and United Parties should get together and that Mr. Coates had made a misMr. J. W. Munro (Labour M.P. for Dunedin North) said he preferred to say nothing. “I don’t care what they do,” he added.