"NO ALTERNATIVE"

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 49, 26 August 1922, Page 6

" NO ALTERNATIVE"

The Government of the United Kingdom, equally with the Government of New Zealand, has been defended'by a resort to the not very complimentary argument of "no alternative." As a sample of this argument, in its application to the United Kingdom, we quote the following from '' The Speoi»tbr ":

'.".■■ ../..even if the Government were publicly of misrule, where, runs the'whisper, are we to find a Substitute? "The men who attack it .may be in the right and be clever critics; but what guarantee have we that they would prove strong enough to carry the weight of administration in days : so difficult? The" Government has ■ managed in ' one way or another to rope in almost all. the men of experience and of administrative ability in the country. There is no Opr position worthy of the name. The Liberals are either effete or else divided. Some of the best of them took the Coalition ' coupon. .Others have drifted away like Mr. M'Kenna, and probably even Lord Grey of FaUodon,' who seems now to hold in effect, if hot in name, an independent attitude. In a word, a Liberal Government able to'take the place of the present Government is unthinkable.

'.? The Spectator " mmi to be willing! to assume, at any rate for the sake of argument, that, as parties are to-day, it is impossible, to secure an alternative Government based on one party. But "The Spectator" does not admit that an alternative Government must necessarily have such a basis— We tally agree that later.it will'be best to get back to the «y«tom of Ministries formed from -experienced Parliamentary leaders representing, if possible, not Coalitions or Groups, but homogene-ous-parties. At present, however,'we want a'different form of Ministry—a Ministry of Affairs. Snch a Ministry must be made up of the best men in the cwintry, wherever they can be found. Their duty will be "not,to farther the interests of any party or section of the community; but simply to "liquidate our terrific difficujties-rfiscal, ■ political, constitutional, and Imperial—and when those difficulties are liquidated, to hand the country back to ite normal governors. Presumably, " to hand the country back to its ■■• normal .governors " would mean to reconstitute parties on party lines and then go to the .electors.' : ' '.' ■'}':-'■■'.'' ' ■■■ •'' .. The proposal of "The Spectator" is interesting, and not, less so because of the many obstacles in the way/ " If," says -the paper, "a Ministry of Affairs could be formed without any distinction of party— and there are pretty few rear distinctions at this moment—and entrusted for a definite period, say for two year*, with the duty of

liquidating the country's difftoulties and then handing the Administration back as a going concern, we believe that there would be an instant reaction throughout the nation—moral, .political, and industrial. We want *a neutral Prime Minister." It is easy, with a stroke of the pen,* to initiate (on paper) a Liquidation Ministry, and to limit Its life to two years. But; in practice, the initiating is difficulti and a time-Umit is impossible. No one who created or helped to create such a Ministry/could define when, where, or how it was to expire, because its tenure would be conditioned mainly by its performances and the ■ need; of them. As " The Spectator " admits, its Liquidation Ministry would be, in effect, a new" form of Coalition,: and coalitions are always in ganger of disintegrating and ending too soon, or of consolidating arid lasting too long. Having, however, allowed so much by way of criticism, it is just and true to add that, the:idea of a non-party liquidating -Adminstration poasesses some merits, and; those merits are iri proportion to the economic urgency of {the situation. The United Kingdom needs an economic readjustment, /but not so urgently as to make that consideration the paramount consideration. But a financial crisis might easily make liquidation not only the paramount need but the sole need. :''-.':'': . .' ' ■ •.-. :.; .''. ■■■■'■

In New Zealand, as in the United Kingdom; parties are no longer classified according to principle. Party boundaries are so much in, confusion that everyone Ib inclined to accept the existing condition as line of least resistance, and to say that there is "no alternative." From the existing standpoint, there may, be no alternative; but' an economic upheaval' might, alter the existing standpoint beyond, recognition. At present everyone is trying, to ease things down as slowly as possible. If things took it upon themselves to fall with a bang, need for camouflage, would disappear, and party precedents would no longer count. In that case, a Liquidation Administration would form itself along, lines of necessity, but how that fact would ultimately kffecfc the ,party lystem no human eye can foresee. "