EDITORIAL VIEWS

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 105, 6 May 1931, Page 10

EDITORIAL VIEWS

VARYING OPINIONS

"UNHARMONIOUS UNION"

(By Telegraph.)"' m (Special.to "The Evening Post.") *" ' ' , AUCKLAND, This Day. In the course of a column leader under the caption "Fusion Offer Declined," the "New Zealand Herald (Reform), says:— "A refusal of the suggestion to amalgamate and form a fusion party, nnd an offer of co-operation to conduct the business of tho country are . the main features of the statement by the Leader of the Opposition in answer'to tho Prime Minister. It'is courteous and, moderate,' yet explicit and uncompromising. It puts into proper perspective the position as betweon tho United and Reform Parties, the role of the Labour Party, and the rights of the people. Analysed and set forth in this- fashion, the course tho Prime Minister proposed appears far less simple, appropriate, or, indeed, inevitable, than was claimed by its ardent eulogists when it was made public. 'Mr. Coatos leaves it perfectly clear that thero is no such singleness of aim, purpose, and feeling between the two parties as would bo essential to fusion in tho" proper sense. If there were, it would not need to bo effected by public .invitation and acceptance. Ho v - was perfectly justified in 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. Ho is , equally justified, therefore, in assuming that the end of that • arrangement, with the proposed roorientation of political relations, ■is duo to tho re-vulsion of Labour, not tho conversion of the United Party. That being so, tho 'elements of the proposed new organisation, would be as uuharmonious as he forecasts. Fusion in those circumstances would leave the last state worso than the first."