The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, JULY 9, 1925. “NO STATEMENT TO MAKE”

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12185, 9 July 1925, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, JULY 9, 1925. “NO STATEMENT TO MAKE”

Is fusion "on” or “off”? Have negotiations concluded, or are the party principals still continuing polite overtures ? A rejk>rt strongly suggesting an inspired source appeared in our evening contemporary yesterday. In striking headlines we were told that fusion was dead (or words to that effect), for the good and sufficient reason that no agreement was found to be possible. As we say, the tone of the announcement and, the manner of its publication gave the impression that the “Post” was not guessing. We wonder who its informant was! However, that in passing. If what the Prime Minister says is correct —and there is no reason to think otherwise—then our contemporary has been misinformed. Mr Coates, who has been empowered by the caucus to decide one way or the other, asserts that he knows nothing of fusion negotiations having terminated unavailingly. Mr T. M. Wilford was approached by a “Times” representative on the same topic. Bafflingly reticent as usual, that gentleman replied that he had no statement to make. This inscrutable pose can be overdone. Your political Sphinx is no longer regarded as either excessively wise or noticeably clever. Still, as the inventor of the now historic “soft-pedal” movement as applied to local politics, Mr Wilford may be permitted some latitude. It seems to us, and to others, that the more he strives to conceal, the more he discloses, directly or indirectly. His right hand rarely fails to know what the left is doing. This curious element in Mr Wilford’s composition has not helped his political advancement. The brazen bravissimo chords of the professional demagogue are lacerating to the nerves; the persistent (and unnecessary) use of the “soft pedal” is only a trifle less trying to one’s patience. The Opposition Leader’s tactics have been at fault ever since he took over control of the Liberal Party. That weakness was emphasised in his original offer to negotiate. He based that offer on the necessity for maintaining the stability of the British Empre —as though the maintenance of the Empire had anything to do with the vain squabbling of Reformers and Liberals over “petty things”! In making that his excuse (or reason) for proposing amalgamation, Mr Wilford was not frank. He kept something behind his back which few discerning people did not almost immediately detect. It was not smart conjuring. If Mr Wilford had seen his duty clear at the outset, there would have been none of these half-hidden mysteries of fusion. -If he had the authority expected in a party leader, he would have taken his courage in both palms, come out into the open, and ended the “vain quarrelling” then and there. The Prime Minister has disclosed that members of the Liberal group had moved in the direction of amalgamation apparently without consulting their chief. That fact should have had a warning for Mr Wilford. But, no; instead of a straight-out declaration for nationalism, to take effect at or subsequent to the General Election, he commenced by trying to bargain his and his party’s way into the Reform camp; another false step. 4 If fusion is doomed, or is to become a reality now or hereafter —and we prefer its chance hereaft'er—it is time the people knew what to expect. '