THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18876, 31 May 1923, Page 6

THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

The Leader of the Opposition has so far neglected to take the people of the dominion into his confidence regarding the attitude of his party towards tho representation of New Zealand at the Imperial Conference. Speaking at Petone early in the month he suggested that a widespread movement, aided by “machine-made resolutions,” in which the ex-Prime Minister of England was implicated, was being engineered “for the purpose of making New Zealanders believe that the Prime Minister is the only fit representative for the Imperial Conference.” In his speech at St. Kilda on Tuesday night, Mr Wilford made certain platitudinous references to the Imperial Conference, observing, among other things, that important matters would bo discussed at it, and he went tho length of outlining his views on one or two points of Imperial policy, but ho carefully refrained from stating whether, in his opinion, there is any person other than the Prime Minister who could fitly represent the dominion. What ho did say, however, was open to tho construction that he did not. regard it as necessary that Mr Massey should attend tile conference. Ho has apparently guarded himself against the admission that if Now Zealand is represented, as she must be, at tho con-

ference, it should he by the Prime Minister. It must be obvious to the public that there is no person but the Prime Minister who could speak at the conference with the necessary authority on such questions ns will claim attention. In fact, and as a matter of constitutional practice, the Imperial Conference is a conference of Prime Minister’s, and it would fail of its purpose unless the Prime Ministers of all the dominions which make up the British Commonwealth attended. When the Liberal Party was in power there was no division of opinion within the party as to who should attend the conference. Why, then, should Mr Wilford hesitate to give an undertaking that his party will assist in facilitating the attendance of the Prime Minister at tire ensuing conference? Mr Wilford declared at St. Kilda that “the LiberalLabour Party stood for Empire and for constitutional methods.” But his most definite contribution so far to the question of the attendance of the Prime Minister is the suggestion to which we have referred that Mr Bonar Law’s “testimonial” to Mr Massey as an Imperial statesman was for the purpose of making New Zealanders believe that the Prime Minister is the only fit representative for the Imperial Conference. In strict constitutional usage the Prime Minister is the only proper representative, and the question of fitness in the litoral sense does nob arise. As Mr Wilford’s party stands for Empire, it will be interesting to see whether it will rise sufficiently above the level of a purely partisan spirit to interpose no obstacles to the success of the Imperial Conference which has become an important Empire institution.