The Daily News MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 1931. THE POLITICAL OUTLOOK.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 August 1931, Page 8

The Daily News MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 1931. THE POLITICAL OUTLOOK.

The unexpected action taken by the House of Representatives on Friday, when it asked the Government to appoint a committee to investigate the economic and financial condition of the Dominion, must have set many people wondering what the ultimate effect on the political situation will be. The aim of the committee, representing all three parties in the House and the Independents, is to produce a new Budget. If it is successful, will the House simply accept its proposals' without question and then revert to its former condition? In the course of his speech on Friday the Prime Minister said that the, committee would have to propose" measures to meet the financial .situation. They would be “ difficult measures, perhaps requiring solid backing to enable them to be put through.” “It requires a National Government,” Mr. W. D. Lysnar interjected, arid Mr. Forbes promptly accepted the suggestion. “In my opinion,” he declared, “this could only be done by the formation of a National Government,” and a moment or two later he added that if a National Government were set up the postponement of the general election would naturally follow. Obviously this portion of the Prime Minister’s utterance was quite impromptu, and it is probable that on seeing a verbatim report of his remarks he was not at all satisfied with them. In his haste he evidently was led into confusion very similar to that associated with his national party offer which was widely interpreted as an invitation to other interests to form a coalition or a National Government, though its true import was the breaking down of certain party barriers and the formation of a new party to take ■over the responsibilities 'of office. A National Government would be formed by each party contributing a certain proportion of Ministers to a conglomerate Cabinet — perhaps four United, four Reform, three Laboui* and one Independent. Each group of Ministers would be responsible, not to the whole House —a pretty ideal, but far too Utopian to be practicable —but to' its 'own party- and there

would be many occasions when the various groups would be pulling in different directions. New Zealand has had experience of a coalition Government in recent times, and it is not the kind of experience the country would like to repeat. Coalition in that case was not a source of strength, except to the extent that it enabled the Government to be autocratic. The Dominion would have been

better off during the war and afterwards if those prominent members of the two principal parties who were able to so eye to eye in respect of the major* issues had formed a party and a Government, leaving the rest to function as the Opposition, for a strong Opposition is an essential part of the machinery of a democratic Parliament. It is not a bit more desirable now than it was fifteen or sixteen years ago that all opposition should be stifled in the House of Representatives, or even a conglomerate Government should be given a free hand. And a conglomerate Government trying to satisfy all parties is still less desirable, for many of its best intentions would be nullified by the necessity for effecting compromises when rival interests clashed. It is by no means improbable that the four-party committee which has been appointed will find itself handicapped by difficulties such as a National Government would inevitably encounter, for* unless Labour is willing to abandon many features of the policy it has pursued so ruthlessly during the present Parliajnent agreement. on essential ■economy measures will be impossible, In that case it will surely be necessary for the representatives of the United and Reform Parties, whose ideals are closely akin and whose purposes so far as the balancing of the Budget is concerned are identical, to pool their strength against the opposition if the desired result is to be obtained. Will not such a position, when it arises as it must, convince them of the wisdom of Mr. Forbes’ original proposal—the merging of the two parties and all those outside the parties who are similarly minded in a new national party pledged to use its utmost endeavours for the financial and economic stabilisation of the Dominion? If the offer had been accepted when it was made valuable time would have been saved, and there would have been no need for a makeshift committee. The best service the committee could give would be to bring together those members who are able to subscribe to a common policy to meet the needs of the times. If that should be the very welcome result the proper course would be for the new party to form its Government arid face the electors in the ordinary way. There should be no talk of postponing the election, for whether there is to be one policy or two or three this is pre-eminently a time when the electorate should be asked to express its mind.