THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, MAY 26, 1928. THE UNITED PARTY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20418, 26 May 1928, Page 10

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, MAY 26, 1928. THE UNITED PARTY.

There is so much that is mysterious about the United Party that any doubt that may exist in the phblic mind concerning the exact position which is occupied by Mr George Fori es in relation to it—whether he is tne leader of the party or simply an acting-leader —may be neither here nor there. Mr Forbes and the Dominion organiser of the party, who made a flying visit to Dunedin this week, brought with them the assurance that, although'the party has not yet prodded itself with a policy, “an excelhnt class of candidate” is offering on its behalf. Further, they have been comforted with the belief that in Dunedin, where the people would seem to bo exceedingly confiding, even to the extent of being prepared to accord thoir support to a political organisation of whose programme they are wholly ignorant, since it has not evolved one, the prospects of the party are “ quite hopeful.” There has, it is true, been confusion about the allocation of constituencies to its prospective candidates —a confusion so great that two of these gentlemen considered it necessary to make it known that they would not contest Hie electorates assigned to them, even if they stood at all—but all this has been satisfactorily dispelled, being due to nothing more serious than “ incorrect reporting in Christchurch.” As an experienced politician, however, Mr Forbes has apparently realised the embarrassment that must be caused to any party through its lack of a. policy. Consequently, ho has taken the responsibility of indicating various points upon which the Government hasexposed itself to criticism. We have a swollen public service ; there is an excessive amount of legislation by regulation, the measure of control exercised by Parliament over the executive is inadequate. This is all perfectly sound criticism, none the less sound because it was as applicable in the days of tho Liberal Government, which Mr Forbes warmly supported, as it is to-day. And to this skeleton of a programme Mr Forbes has added the desirability, as he regards it, of electoral reform in the direction of the introduction of preferential voting. If tho Government will secure the enactment this year of a measure providing for preferential voting it will, Mr Forbes says, prevent the evil of a splitting of votes at tho general election. The passage of legislation ad hoc is hardly commendable. There is precedent for it in the matter of the electoral law, but the precedent itself is unfortunate. It should

bo unnecessary to remind Mr Forbes of the manner in which the Ward Government was hoist by its own petard when it forced the second ballot system on the country. The electors looked with strong disfavour on a legislative device that was mainly prompted by a desire to put the third political party, which was then emerging, at a disadvantage at the polls, tyloreover, if Mr Forues recognises, as apparently ho does, the danger of the splitting, ol votes At the general election, he must perceive that it will be at the doors of the United Party that the responsibility for that danger will surely lie.