Grey River Argus FRIDAY, MAY 1, 1931. PARTY VERSUS POLICY.

Grey River Argus, 1 May 1931, Page 4

Grey River Argus FRIDAY, MAY 1, 1931. PARTY VERSUS POLICY.

Whejher they issue in a fiasco or a fusion, the secret parleys which admittedly have both preceded and succeeded Mr Forbes’s (appeal for support to the (Tories ■ cannot obscure obvious (consequences. The mere fact of such a thing being so seriously considered must convince the whole - country of one 'fact at least. It is that there remains to-day in this country only lone party that is unalterably ■faithful in standing by its principles and its policy. There is no 'need to name that party. It is ’the one which has been paid unj consciously a high tribute by the ’Prime Minister. He has not judged it to resemble either his own ’or Mr Coates’s party in being of .such a jellyfish or compromising .character that it would sell out for the sake of mere expediency. 'As a leading Reform organ yes- | terday acknowledged quite ean|didly, “A National ’Government (would include Labour. A national ,P|rty — the kind of Party Mr Forbes asks for— makes Labour j the official Opposition, and the only party in the Dominion unshaken and unchanged!” The Labour Party may be entirely indifferent to the upshot of the negotiations expected to be concluded to-day—it may welcome heartily the very important duty of being ■the official Opposition, especially ,against such an administration as 'might T>e hatched from a fusion—(but the public will observe a glaring inconsistency in the excuses 'advanced for Mr Forbes’s action by those anxious for a fusion. Thus it is said that his action in taking the money he sought almost entirely from the earning classes has had the hearty endorsement of ( a. majority in the country no less (than in Parliament. But if Mr (Forbes honestly felt for a moment that his policy has had the majority behind it, then it would not be Io this resort to an|Other party, but to the votes of the people that he would look in [order to get the backing- he feels to be yet lacking. Moreover, as remarked by “the Press,” “it is not altogether without significance that no one has shown quite so much eagerness to bring fusion about, as the party that fusion is intended to thwart!” Thus we (have it. acknowledged that what jMr Forbes calls the object of ■ putting through the legislation Ito allow the necessary economies to be made,” is an object that is [against the working class and its representatives. What is there in the Prime Ministers’ conception of “legislation to allow the necessary economies to be made” which causes him to fear the fate of his [party were they to let it stand or ifall by its merits before both Parliament and the country? He as 1 good as says his fears of inability [to cope with the situation are due to “the experience of the session | just closed!” Does that excuse indicate that he for an instant believes the Government has come out of the session with flying col,ours? Does he fear that the ease 'tor Labour as advanced during the session has carried throughout the Dominion a greater Conviction [than he dare openly admit? What may explain the Reform hesitation in marrying the Uniteds is a fear that there is no political divorce (Court. The “Dominion,” for instance, says they “cannot enter blindly into a pact that, once accepted, would be binding,” whilst the Auckland Herald is uncertain J whether it would be a prosperous /'wedding, remarking that ‘it does :ino injustice to Mr Forbes and his ! (colleagues to conclude that their [proposal really amounts to an aekInowledgment that in the present circumstances, economic and pol|itieal, they-do not feel eompetitent .Ito carry on the Government of the | country. ” How does such an opinion square with the cry that the Prime Minister’ is the strong man for the emergency? If they do go in, the Reformers will have held , two reasons for so doing. One will be their desire that the “necessary economies” shall be all at the expense of the working masses. The other will be their recognition in common with the Uniteds—and this is certainly a good enough basis for a fusion—that the rise of the Labour Party to a more powerful .and dominant position in the body politic is so certain and inev- • itable as to leave the opposing ■ elements no option but combination for the preservation, however [ temporarily, of their economic dictatorship in this country.