THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, JULY 13, 1925. THE FUSION DEBATE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19530, 13 July 1925, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, JULY 13, 1925. THE FUSION DEBATE.

Thf, discussion on the amendment to the Address-in-Reply which was proposed by Mr Atmore, member for Nelson, affirming the need for the formation of “a strong, stable, national Government” was disappointing in the respect that it did not furnish the public with any enlightenment concerning the nature and progress of the negotiations, still evidently under way, for a fusion of the Reform and Liberal parties. The most noteworthy contribution to the discussion was that furnished by the Minister of Marine. Unfortunately, however, it was one that threw a great deal of cold water upon the scheme of fusion to which the Reform party, by its resolution expressing its willingness to discuss proposals for amalgamation, and the Government, by entering into the negotiations, have certainly given their countenance. Mr Anderson laid stress on the fact that members on both the Reform and the Liberal side of the House had given pledges to their constituents before their election to the present Parliament under which they were bound to a certain course of action. He claimed that, if they accepted Mr Atmore’s view, they would dishonour their pledges, and he insisted that, in these circumstances, the fusion proposals constituted a matter concerning which the electorates had a right to be consulted: It is clear that, if Mr Anderson was expressing not his own opinion only but the opinion also of his colleagues and of the majority of the Reform party, there has never been the slightest prospect of an immediate or early fusion and that the time that has been consumed by the negotiations has been to a large extent, if not entirely, wasted. There is a Certain plausibility in the argument that the members of the parties that have been in negotiation were elected as members of the Reform party and Liberal party respectively for the currency of the Parliament. It is not an argument, however, that carries an overwhelming amount of weight when it is known that the feeling of the electors of sober, moderate views throughout the country is generally favourable to a fusion. There are some constituencies in which contests between candidates already in the field on behalf of the two negotiating parties are inevitable, and it is equally inevitable that in a few of these cases, where triangular contests cannot be avoided, the seat will be gained on a minority vote by a Socialist candidate. That will be regrettable, but there will be no escape from such a result. We have very little doubt, however, that, so firmly convinced are the supporters of the Reform and Liberal parties in most of the electorates of the desirability of a fusion, Mr Atmore was not mistaken when he said that “if business men were taken from outside the House, who saw the instability of representative institutions, they would fix the thing up in 20 minutes.” It is, too, a highly significant circumstance that the Liberals in the House to a man voted in favour of Mr Atmore’s amendment. As they have thus publicly and unanimously declared their sense that it is “imperatively necessary” that a national party should be formed, it is important that the public should know why it is that the negotiations are still being allowed to drag on without any indication that finality is being approached.