Evening Post. THURSDAY, AUGUST 6, 1931. NOT A PARTY GAME

Evening Post, Volume 32, Issue 32, 6 August 1931, Page 12

Evening Post. THURSDAY, AUGUST 6, 1931. NOT A PARTY GAME

The news that there is to be no political crisis on the Budget will be received'with a sense of relief in all quarters where the national good is not subordinated to party ends. The Reform Party has evidently considered its attitude with care. w The length and number of the caucuses held since the Budget appeared "are evidence of that, and were mainly responsible for misgivings concerning the party's intentions. Certainly Reform was placed in a difficult position. The Budget on some points disiegarded principles > for which Reform had fought. On the other hand ? . other and greater principles' which were and are "cardinal in Reform policy.' ,The issuej.before the paity was whether it ivould insist upon complete acceptance of its policy,' or, failing such complete acceptance; • .would t -insist upon the .minor principles and thus defeat the major aims of Reform and United. .It will bej gratifyingl to the coimtry generally that Reform '.has decided to place first things first-f- 1 even>at die cost of being, the" villain, of the piece in a second .pamphlet By Mr. -Holland,:- "How. the' "Reformers', vdWd.'.^ t;V . 5 >; 4;5i *^fe .ourselves'had little doubt thab the'pledge ,of 'co-operation w6tu\Tbe given latrue interpretation; but there has,-been sqmeyun'easiness' arising' from Jthe.''silence ( of the mpreT response, ibTejsJeaderaVof •! the .party 7- ana'the promiijefice.irattained lby ,the ,les?,; re-sp^orisible^^'die-hard.('critics. '.iJTHese' latter "Have; r 'among/6ther thirigs,'^uggeSted''.lliafj immediate? balancing^ of* the'^Budget' was not essential that adveYseyexchange should Ec allowedtojruh^to^'tjje'Australian, levekso that fanner 1 might'benefit, and thatanjembargo should be placed on certain, imports.' If such members had been permitted' to dictate \he party policy there is no knowing where it would lead. Sooner or later it "would end disastrously. Fortunately those who have been, most prominent in debate with such pro» posals, appear to have accepted the cQunsel >f of their more silent.colleagues.'. -Mr. Coates's unequivocal declaration in support of the Govern-, menu's,' ''Budget-balancing' 'proposal' proveJtKat-the' party is not yet prepared'to sacrifice an essential financM/prirfciple or to force apolitical crisis so that the mere appearance of. consistency.may be maintained-", ' ■■ JTfre, Budget difficulties are,"how-.-ever,-not "yet at an end. While deciaringithat*'Reform would continue tolhelp/rather than,hinder the Government,) and whilei accepting freely thV'inain, ,aim-.of 'a balanced Budget, Mr.'Coates 1 reserved to^his party the right, to criticism on Budget particulars; \£hen,'these,are submitted to'the Hxrase inVthe taxing Bills. No exception' can^b'e taken"to this''reserva- \ tijai, ;,Th'e Budget cannot'be held to be*^a v perfect instrument. -It places heavy, burdens 'upon' several classes of'the cctomunity. In a general way I tHese burdens are fairly distributed, i At no point can it be said that the load is crippling. But there is room for an explanation of costs to' see what further immediate economies can ,be made, so that the need for. extra taxation may be lessened. Reform is especially anxious to avoid the 3 percent, primage, mainly because it opposed a 2 per cent, prim-' age strongly. It fears a charge of-inconsistency. This charge,is not one which need worry the'party. The Government has laid itself open to a similar charge on several grounds, but the Prime Minister has wisely and courageously decided that a weak insistence of apparent consistency shall not deter him from consistency in pursuit of a greater aim —the financial stability of the coun v tiy. Nevertheless, if consistency in minor points is attainable without whittling away at stability, it is cer-< tainly worth an effort. The consistency argument does not apply so strongly to the other main point of detail cited by Mr. Coates—reduction of the income tax exemption' and alteration of the graduation. This alteration of the graduation carries further* the policy of Mr. Downie Stewart, which we strongly opposed at the time. We regret to see that policy copied and extended; but we cannot'overlook the fact that the extension has been made after the imposition of a 30 per cent, surtax which sufficiently indicates the grav,ity'.pf the crisis which makes the impost necessary.

If, however, the burden imposed ' in this-way or by other income and I Customs taxation can be lightened I ihe !relief would be welcome and,l most surely beneficial to the country. It can" be attained only by further economies. In our first comment on | the .Budget >we admitted this, but I now, as then, we see great difficulty I in the way of further immediate | savings. In time national expenditure can surely be reduced, but the greater economies can only be brought about gradually or in many instances at the cost of hardship gi eater than that which will be imposed by additional taxation. There is this reservation to be made, however: what is difficult and almost impossible to a single minority party (either in accelerating economy or in insisting upon, savings which would otherwise be unacceptable) may be accomplished by two parties. working together and honestly putting party interests aside for the

greater good of the countiy. Economies which would be resisted fieicel) af suggested from the Government benches may be accepted if pioposed by the Opposition. If the Opposition can give real help in this way we trust that the Government ''will accept it freely. From the lone of Mr. Coates's statement and his abstention from parly criticism, and from the equally ready acceptance by the Minister of Lands of his offer, we are, led to hope that something may be achieved in this way. It would' be achieved, we are certain, if tHe two parties could meet as one party without Labour interfering in an1 endeavour to aggravale differences' and score political points. Such^ a meeting now_ seems impossible',\buts'a" measure of agreement is still attainable if United and Reform will,keep on the high ground takencLby the leaders. Labour will continue to rake up old differences, but'we think the people will take a wider,' view, and will not endorse such." •' attempts to play the party game.