LABOUR AND THE WAR.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 16463, 16 August 1915, Page 4

LABOUR AND THE WAR.

The Political Labour Party in the dominion, having refused to participate in the formation of a National Ministry, and its representatives in Parliament having deliberately absented themselves from the House when the announcement of the decision to form this Ministry was made, is apparently realising that it has made a mistake and is putting forward excuses for its action. Mr Paul attempted, at a social meeting on Saturday night, to justify the refusal of the party with which he is identified to have anything to do with the establishment of a National Ministry. Tho absurdity of his effort to belittle the Ministry by representing it as a mere Fusion Ministry, composed of members of the Reform and Opposition parties, and as not a National Ministry at all because it does not include any member of the Labour Party is transparent, It was, ha says, necessary that the Labour Party should be represented in the Ministry if it was to be styled a National Ministry. But, as he knows, the Labour Party might have been represented in the Ministry if it had so chosen. It decided against being represented. Tho Labour Party having been offered representation in the Ministry, and having rejected tho offer, it is not open to it now to refuse to recognise the Ministry as a National Ministry because there is no Labour member in it. If there was anything in Mr Paul's argument, it would come to this, that the Labour Party itself, by refusing tho offer of representation, prevented the Ministry from being a National Ministry. Mr Paul proceeded, however, from one absurd contention to another. After making for the Labour Party the largo claim that it was its responsibility to tell the people the truth, the suggestion apparently being that the other parties withhold the truth, he said that the Labour Party would have 'had to bury its principles if it had joined in tho movement for the formation of a National Government and that it would have had to agree to everything which the Government decided to propose. We hope that Mr Paul himself knows better than this. It is a purely childish assumption that the members of the parties which have agreed to the establishment of a National Ministry are committed to the acceptance of all tho proposals of that Ministry. Mr Sidey exposed the invalidity of Mr Paul's argument when he said that even' member of the Opposition is at perfect liberty to criticise the proposals of the National Ministry. So is every member of the Reform Party. So, also, is every member of the Labour Party. The difference between the representation of the Labour Party in the National Ministry and its non-representation is that in the former case it would have had a voice in the preparation of the ministerial proposals. And it is quite clear- that a voice in a Cabinet specially formed as a National Cabinet would be much more powerful than a voice in the House. The Labour Party decided, however, that it would not avail itself of the advantage which the presence in the Ministry of a member of its party would have given it. Tho fact is that it missed a great opportunity, and the probability is that it is now realising this.