THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 1925. A NATIONAL ISSUE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19498, 5 June 1925, Page 8

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 1925. A NATIONAL ISSUE.

The prospects of a merger or fusion of the two principal political parties in the State seem to be rather more promising at the present time than at any period in the past. The Prime Minister made a friendly gesture, so to say, in his initial manifesto last week. The first response of the leader of the Liberal Party was tentatively agreeable, and Mr Wilford lias amplified the statement in a letter addressed to Mr Coates which wo publish this morning. There are a few points in the- letter which might lend themselves to controversial treatment, but we pass them over, because peace, not acrimony, should be the note of the hour. “Lot us pub aside any vain quarrelling* over potty things,” Mr Wilford urges; and the counsel, so obviously wise, will be the more readily accepted because the counsellor has no personal ambitions in view. “Let mo say to you and your party and the electors of New Zealand that I neither desire nor would accept office if n new party eventuated.” Due recognition should be given to Mr Wilford'-: disinterestedness, and his promise to help the cause of political stability will bo unreservedly trusted. He welcomes the proposal of a conference or committee, and remarks, perhaps a shade too complacently, that “if after a conference no policy can he agreed on, and no amalgamation can take place, each party will have the satisfaction of knowing that in the interests of the dominion an effort has been made.” Well and good, so far ; but Mr "Wilford and his party —yes, and the Reform Party also—should recognise that the country as a whole will have scant ground for “satisfaction” if the project of conciliation fails. It ought not to fail. If a genuinely patriotic feeling prevails in inter-party councils it will not fail. We are convinced that the largo majority of the electors favour some sort of anti-extremist alliance. No doubt it cannot be dogmatically said that the initiative of alliance should come from this quarter or from that. But it can he said most emphatically that no minor considerations should slaml in the wav of a national design. “It is not a case,” as a Wellington contemporary “in which any

punctilios of etiquette should ho allowed to block or to delay the realisation of a course which the interests of both parties and of the whole nation imperatively demand.” If the pressure of long-established prejudices can be got rid of, mere punctilios should be unimportant. It should matter little as to which party makes the decisive advance. Historians may notice and record to which side the balance of patriotic spirit inclined. The suggestion of a joint Refonn and Liberal committee, to deliberate on the subject of party relationships, is worthy of consideration, but not of consideration so prolonged as indefinitely to delay decision. There is danger of copious talk ending in nothing; but if anything is to be done in the direction of establishing stability of government during the present year, now is the time. There are divergences of opinion, no doubt. Reformers may not he unanimous on the merger question, and some Liberals pathetically cherish the notion that there is work for Liberalism to do on its own account, if it could only get the opportunity of doing it. The idea of the work and the idea of the opportunity are alike fantastic. But there is nothing fantastic in the present opportunity of patriotic co-operation. It is quite true, as Mr Wilford suggests, that the co-operative movement should not be directed against legitimate Labour. The 1101 V National Party, whatever name it may assume, must be a progressive party, representative of all interests, —Reform, Liberal, moderate Labour, Imperialist, in the best sense of terms that are sometimes misused.