"NO BLANK CHEQUE"

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 124, 29 May 1922, Page 6

"NO BLANK CHEQUE"

Sir Andrew Russell, who will contest the Hawkes Bay seat as an Independent, "States that he " is not prepared to sign a blank cheque in favour of this or any other Government"; also that "at the present time, on a vote of want of confidence in the Government, I should' frankly vote for it [the Government], on the ground that the interests of this country would not be served by a change." On both points, the Evening Post agrees with Sir Andrew Russell. In order to analyse the Parliamentary position, it is helpful to recall the last: election campaign. The ' Reform Party, though by no means living fully up to its name, was on that occasion the/ Party of safety, w&s" held in y^fepect, and had a fighting chance to secure an absolute majority of seats .(which, in the end, it did). The Liberal Party, of shrunken principles and.. atature, had a chance of winning enough seats, at the expense of Reform, *to make them both minority parties, in which cade the Liberals would have been tempted to take office under the dictation of extremist Labour. The electors' choice, therefore, was among (1) a Reform Party possessed of a majority chance, (2) a Liberal Party with a minority chanpe, and (3) extreme Labour. For an elector who wished to insure himself against the peril of extremist domination, exerted either through an extremist Government or through an extremist-supported Liberal Government, the triple bill offered little choice. Political Labour was, visibly, much Redder then than now; and a voter primarily influenced by this danger had practically no alternative. To vote for Reform was to vo be for safety. •

From aii election fought in these conditions resulted a Jlouse in which there was—and is—no alternative to a Reform Government. Whoy would to-day, if he had the power, turn the Massey Ministry out of office? Only those who would be prepared to"^velcome a Government leaning upon extremism; and we are glad that they do not include Sir Andrew Russell.- The fact is that to substitute for a Government holding a majority of seats, a Government holding a minority of seats, would be, to the common interest?

of the country, the greatest disservice. Nor is it yet clear whether, when the next General Election comes round, the country will find any salvation" in an exchange of parties. Reform, with its merits and demerits, remains much as it was; the new Liberal Party—the Liberal remnant Rump, trying to add to itself progressive and Labour elements—has yet to win its spurs; Mi 8. Holland's Labour Party, bleached from Red to Pink, has still to prove" that it has a real place in evolutionary constructive politics. . So far it has not lived down its extremist past; may not wish to live it down; and is at least as much under suspicion of revolutionary-tendencies as Reform is under suspicion of reactionary^ tendencies. Admittedly there is room for a progressive middle party, but the Wilford-Stat-ham combination has still to show cause; and it is a fair summing up to' say that, at the moment, political parfcyism in New Zealand commands little enthusiasm^except on the part of the partisans. And that brings u's to Sir Andrew Russell's second point—his independence of-party. In the present state of parties, The Post hopes for much from independents of personal calibre. A change may come, by means of which independents and free lances may find an affinity; but, as things aire just now, personal ability in Parliament is more useful outside the: bonds of party than within them. If we had a seat in the existing Parliament, we would have no desire to expel the Massey Government, and certainly no thought of giving the Massey Government a blank cheque in the shape of freedom from candid criticism; and We would expect no more and no less of Sir Andrew Russell. We hope that men of character and capacity, such as he, will always hold independent positions in the New Zealand Parliament when partyism is 'in the slack state that prevails at present rand tha^, their personalities will provide some foil to the ever-present Parliamentarian of purely party merit. To say that is not to say that the partysystem stands , finally condemned. We rather incline to the view that the party system will be benefited if there remain outside it certain independent units who will correctits faults, and thereby exert a regulating influence to save it from itself. ■ ' •.