KEEPING THE DOOR OPEN

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 45, 21 August 1931, Page 6

KEEPING THE DOOR OPEN

In ils reply to Mr. Coates's statement on the National Government proposal the Committee of Wellington business men yet holds to the hope that there may be reconsideration. It is pointed out by the Committee that exploration of the possibilities cannot be really effective if carried out by members of one party without' discussion and close collaboration ; with- members of-the other party. There has not so far been such discussion and collaboration. What is really needed is personal contact. Letters and statements do not get to grips with the realities. Mr. Samuel missed this point when he suggested that the .Prime Minister should issue an invitation to every party in the House to take its share of responsibility; The Prime Minister's original proposal did not exclude Labour; but Labour counted itself out. •■ We cannot see how it 'could.have done otherwise, as Parliament had just come through a session in which Labour had resisted by all means in its power the Government proposals for dealing with the emergency. National difficulties' have, since become much more acute. If Labour now perceives this and is prepared to meet the other parties iri* a truly national effort to grapple with the problems, we may be sure that its aid would be welcomed. But if such aid,is withheld, other parlies should yet strive for the greatest attainable measure of unity. The emergency session, while it revealed the difficulty of forming a National Government which would include Labour, disclosed at the same time a substantial measure of agreement in the United and Reform policies. It then became a question of how that agreement should be made more effective. We have held, and numerous business men of both parties have held, that the formation of a National Government would achieve this purpose. Mr. Coates has proposed instead a co-operation which carries with it no sharing of responsibility. Mr. D. Jones suggested yesterday that the only offer of any practical value so far made toward a fusion of the parties was Mr. Coates's offer of a committee to consult the Government .regarding legislation, economy, and finance. Had this committee been i proposed as a means of arranging a union it Would have been helpful,! but as a substitute for union it could not be acceptable. It would lessen the authority of the Government without sharing the responsibility. . It would, in fact, assume sortie of the functions of the Cabinet without the Cabinet's responsibility foi its actions. There are certainly possibilities in committee examination of the I present position to afford Jthe Government the aid of advisers jwho are not otherwise available for continuous consultation. But therejean be no purpose in setting up a committee of political elements alone—since political representatives call give their opinions in the House,land, if they desire more intimate association in the work of Government, can accept the Prime Minister's offer to form a part of the Government Nonpolitical elements cannot be irought into consultation in the same way. We think it would be worth -While to consider if their advice, maylbe obtained by other means. Some time ago we suggested an econom c conference of banking, commercial, producing, manufacturing, and jindus- ' trial representatives. If such a conference were summoned, the searching examination of difficultiek and remedies that would ensue would, we believe, help lo convince all b|a the most sceptical of the urgency kf ihe greatest measure for national l^iiy.