FUSION REJECTED

Waipa Post, Volume 42, Issue 3293, 7 May 1931, Page 5

FUSION REJECTED

REFORM LEADER'S STATEMENT.

THE POSITION REVIEWED.

The expected announcement of the Reform Party's attitude over the offer of the Prime Minister (Hon. G. W. Forbes) to do all possible to bring about fusion of the present United and Reform parties in Parliament, was made by the Hon. j. G. Coates on Tuesday afternoon, and he definitely rejects the advances. In a lengthy review of the position, Mr Coates says:—

The Reform Party has accepted without reserve your assurance that your suggestion is dictated with no view to personal or party advantage, and is.made in what you consider the best interest of the country, and I ask you to believe that the Reform Party in refusing at this late stage in the life of the present Parliament to disband and form a new party with the United and Independent members of the House does so in the belief that such action would not be in the best interest of the Dominion.

It does not appear to us that by naming the proposed party the Nationalist party any special sanction or authority is acquired which entitles either party to depart from its pledges to the electors or without consulting the electors to start anew with, as you express it, a clean slate. My experience is, as you are aware, that a Government must fall or resign when its policy ceases to command approval or, if it wishes to change its declared policy, must consult the electors. If this sound rule is to be relaxed it must be done by the electors and no one else. No offer to office will induce us to join in an attempt to remove from the electors this right, especially when so early as next November the future policy of the country will be determined by them. ALLIANCE WITH LABOUR.

Avowedly the bond between the United Party, the Labour Party and the Independents which enabled the United Party to gain and retain office was their common animosity to the Reform Party. Our policy has not changed, and as far as we are aware the alliance you have maintained with the Labour Party for two sessions has come to an end not because you are converted to the policy we have advocated, but because the Labour Party is dissatisfied with your policy. Those who are asking that all available political forces be ranged against Labour are influenced by fear of the accession of Labour to power. Since we do not share that fear, we refuse to destroy ourselves and to become part of a party, however named, called into being for a reason which will influence every step it takes. The Reform Party seeks to represent not a section of, but the whole, people. REFORM'S PAST RECORD.

While I appreciate the good faith which dictated your statement, I cannot but think that the very short life of your own party has blinded you to the fact that a party that has served the country for many years and has a record of service in office and out of office of which its adherents are pround cannot be torn up by the roots by its representatives in Parliament at a moment's notice, and I think on further reflection your long experience in Parliament will convince you that more than a name is needed to secure the stability and harmony so essential to strong government, and you must know that the proposed new party would contain none of the elements of stability or harmony and all seeds of inefficiency. To my mind the suggested party would mean to the country great loss and little gain, inasmuch as at the present time a party to be effective must be knit in closest agreement on principle and policy. A Ministry of expediency, chosen as suggested, on practically the eve of an election, by members elected on different programmes, would command in the House neither confidence nor loyalty, and in my opinion would inevitably suffer from disruption.

BID FOR FARMERS' VOTE. MAY BE EARLY APPEAL TO COUNTRY. Writing from Wellington on Tuesday afternoon, before Mr Coates' declaration was made public, a gentleman, well-informed on political topics, reported that it is now considered certain the Reform party will turn down Mr Forbes' offer to form a National Government and Mr Coates is expected to make the momentous pronouncement within the next few days. The leader of the Opposition in his statement will reveal that the Reform party has decided to stake its existence on an appeal to the farmer, and it is believed that his platform will contain some sensational and revolutionary changes in policy. The most important concerns the country's fiscal policy. New Zealand's secondary industries are to be sacrificed to cheap production costs for the primary industries. In other words, protection as it is known to-day is to go overboard and Empire Freetrade will take its place. Thus only such secondary industries as can exist in unrestricted competition with British-made goods will be able to survive. The aim of this policy, it will be claimed, will be to bring down prices in the Dominion to the level of those operating in the Old Country, and by thus cheapening costs enable the farmer to balance his budget. It is believed in circles in close touch with the Reform organisation that Mr Coates once he turns the fusion offer down will not waste any time in preparing for an appeal to the country, and there is quite a big chance that the coming session will be sensationally short, and that a Re-form-Labour or Labour-Reform noconfidence motion will precipitate an immediate appeal to the country.

MR LYE'S COMMENT. EXTENDING LIFE OF PARLIAMENT. When Mr F. Lye's attention was drawn to the statement made on the subject of a fusion of parties by Mr

J. A. Young, M.P. for Hamilton, he expressed surprise that the member for Hamilton should have emphasised that Mr Forbes' objective was to extend the life of Parliament. Mr Young may have had a certain reason for introducing such a matter in his address, but it was surprising for the reason that the matter had not been touched on before by any member of any party. There had been no suggestion yet of prolonging the life of Parliament by the United or any other party. In his apparent keenness to find an argument against Mr Forbes' proposals the member for Hamilton had gone out of his way to suggest something that had not been seriously discussed. JVIr Young was not correct in saying that the idea of creating a new party was engineered by the 1928 committee. "That committee," said Mr Lye, "disbanded as soon as the elections were over." Mr Lye went on to say that apparently Mr Young had lost sight of the numerous requests from the people of the Dominion that had been sent to Mr Forbes and also the Reform Party demanding that in the national interest party feeling and interests should be submerged for the time being at least. These requests cams from people not associated with tl\e 1928 committee or any otehr committGG. "To-day there is a multiplicity of parties with a multiplicity of policies," said Mr Lye. "The coming together of the responsible parties would do much to restore national confidence in New Zealand and would indicate to the world that New Zealand at least is prepared to do what is so necessary in such a time of economic stress as the present."