The Gisborne Herald. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” THURSDAY, JANUARY 11, 1940. NEW ZEALAND’S PART

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20142, 11 January 1940, Page 6

The Gisborne Herald. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” THURSDAY, JANUARY 11, 1940. NEW ZEALAND’S PART

In the address which the cleputyPrirne Minister broadcast to the Dominion there were three things which stood out predominantly—firstly, the clear exposition of the war aims of the Allies and the menace to the world should they not be realised, secondly, the magnificent effort which is being made by the British nation, and, thirdly, the imperative need for a greater concentration in New Zealand itself on the prosecution of the war. Apart from the doleful tone in which it was delivered—which is partly natural and partly, no doubt, due to a recognition of his heavy responsibilities—Mr. Fraser's address was unexceptionable. He has obviously returned to New Zealand with a verv full realisation of the magnitude of the task that lies ahead and with a firm determination that the Dominion should play its part. It was notable, in particular, and highly commendable, that, unlike some of his colleagues, he found no occasion to obscure or confuse the war effort with political considerations. On the contrary, his remarks might have come from the leader of any party and for this reason both Mr. Fraser personally and what he had to say will command greater respect. Further weight is given to his words by the knowledge of his recent contacts with the political and military leaders of Britain and France and his clear understanding of the problems of the future.

Mr. Fraser’s brief reference to the war aims deserves emphasis. As he pointed out, New Zealand has been to the forefront in opposing aggression and supporting the principle of collective security. In these circumstances, consistency and honesty demanded that there should be no hesitation when the challenge came. More than that, however, there is the motive of self-preservation to- justify New Zealand's prompt entry into the war, because, as Mr. Fraser rightly pointed out, “the existence of our commonwealth and of New Zealand as an integral part of it, is at stake in the present conflict. A defeat for British arms would mean the end of New Zealand as a self-governing nation.” Those words should be weighed carefully by isolated groups pf people in the community who persist in doubting the war aims and ridiculing the war effort. They fail to realise just how much they personally and New Zealand as a nation have at stake and what the results would be were the independence of the Dominion to disappear. To again quote Mr. Fraser, “our economic life and the social fabric which is built on it . . . would collapse into dust.” In other words, New Zealand is today fighting for its very existence as we know it, for the freedom and independence which give, its people inestimable advantages over some 'others, and the situation demands that the fight should be taken up, not half-heartedly, but with the greatest possible energy and determination. Except, perhaps, by inference, Mr. Fraser did not find fault with New Zealand’s war effort, but who could have failed to be impressed by his outline of the spirit that was actuating the people of the Mother Country and of the magnificent way in which they are facing the present trial and danger? “In the eyes of the people of Britain the war is a crusade against the greatest force of evil in the world to-day,” he said. “They are prepared to make any sacrifice in a cause which is sacred to them.” Later on, he said that “in both the military and civil war efforts the nation is as one. . . . National service is accepted as an ever,y-day fact . . . Wherever they are on service they are showing the same spirit of cheerful devotion ... In industry workers are straining 'every nerve to produce to the maximum . . .

The agricultural work of Great Britain is being organised in a more efficient and thorough fashion than ever before.” And so he went on, giving one illustration after another of how everything else had been subordinated to the one great purpose of winning the war. Even at this distance it should be possible to realise something of what the people of the Mother Country are doing and it is surely not too much to expect that in a Dominion which has so much in common with the rest of the Empire, and which is so vitally and completely dependent upon it, there should be an echo of the same spirit.

Intentionally or otherwise, Mr. Fraser left the impression that he was drawing a contrast between the atmosphere at Home and that in New Zealand. How much of what he said about the people of the Mother Country could be said with equal truth about those of New Zealand? What did he mean when he remarked that “the Mother Country and the other Dominions are doing their share nobly and well?” Clearly he is not satisfied with our own effort and our own sacrifices, and so he issues the appeal: “Let each and all of us play our part. Our promises and commitments to Britain must be honoured.”

tlis first appeal is for the recruits which are so sorely needed to fill the gaps in the Special Force, but, as he made clear, that is only the start, and not the end, of New Zealand’s part in the war. “The rest of us,” he says, “must bend our backs to the many tasks on hand. . . . National service must be the principle, the precept, and the practice of all of us.” The fact must be faced that New Zealand, perhaps because of its isolation from the theatre of the war, has not yet responded as it should, but talks such as those given by Mr. Fraser should help, at least, to make people realise just how much is at stake, how great their responsibilities are, and how necessary it is, to use his own words, that “our lives must be dedicated to the struggle for national and international regihteousness.”