The Dominion WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER. 12, 1919. A FALSE POSITION

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 41, 12 November 1919, Page 6

The Dominion WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER. 12, 1919. A FALSE POSITION

It is the usual device of a politician when he finds himself in an awkward corner to talk about something else. That is what Sin Joseph Ward did when he delivered a political speech in Ohristchurch on Monday'night. Realising, no doubt, that he' is expected to explain why he reverted to a party attitude on the eve of the session, he referred to the dissolution of the National Government, but only _ to branch off on an irrelevant side issue. What the country-wants to know is why Sin Joseph AVard is attempting, to divide it on party lines which pay no regard to the real political issues of the day. Thp Leader of the Opposition threw no light on this question, but lie went to a great deal of trouble to explain that he and those who stand with him had done no wrong to the .Reform Government or Party. After dealing with the political truce which followed on the last general election and maintaining that the National Government "ceased to exist when the Peace Treaty was signed," he observed that since th» day he had entered the National Government he and his party had played the game all through, "and all the return they got for it was & cry from the poor Reformers that they had been badly treated." _ All this no doubt would be pertinent enough if only a party bargain were in question, but what Sin Joseph Ward seems unable to realise is that he is called upon to give an account of his actions not to members or Ministers of the Reform Party, but to the people of New Zealand. It may be conceded readily that a political party in that character owes nothing to other parties. _ The country, however, has a right to expect loyal service from all political parties. The people, to whom obsolete party divisions mean little, arc not a whit concerned about the arrangements party leaders have made and ended, but they have every right to resent'an attempt to split the_ forces of progress for the sake of personal and party ambitions. The charge laid against Sir Joseph Ward and his supporters is not that they have treated the Reform Party badly, but that they have treated the country badly and are doing so in this campaign by taking a course which hampers and may prevent a free expression of the popular will. The facts fortunately are so well defined that the people of the Dominion can be under no delusion in regard to what Sm Joseph Ward] \has dono and is doing. jpolitical division - that seriously] [matters in this country is between! jthoso who are prepared to work inj an orderly and methodical way to ipromote its welfare and a body ofi heavily tinged with Bolshevism, whoso hand is against the community as a whole. Though itl i? in a minority, the extremist faction is far from being negligible. It makes its influence felt in all the main centres and in some other parts of tho Dominion, and it seems to have been adequately represented at Sin Joseph Ward's meeting in Christchurch. It is the selfevident duly of all loyal men to take an uncompromising stand against the extremists who aim at wrecking industry and unseating the foundations of social life. How far Sin Joseph Ward has approached such an attitude the public may be left to judge. It is plain, at all events, that he bears full responsibility for raising obstacles to an efficient combination of political force which would at once reduce the extremists to relative insignificance and in all respects simplify the task of the electors in securing effectual representation. To block such a combination is to split progressive forces which in all essentials arc on common ground; Sin Joseph Ward has demonstrated that in electioneering policy he is prepared to go to extravagant lengths. He and his supporters have failed utterly to show that there is any material divergence in working policy between the' two main parties. Such feeble attempts as have been made in this direction arc sufficiently discredited by the experience of last session, when the parties worked unitedly together in putting through a comprehensive programme of Illation which involved many vital aspects of policy. In pointing out fJuifc some of the measures passed last session were in-epared undnr the immediate auIhority of Liberal Ministers, the Liberals have simply added to tiff* ■videncn which convicts them of subordinating national interests to party ambitions. Any questions that arc open between the Liberals and the Reform Party over the dissolution of the National Govern-

ment, if there are any, are of minor importance. But it is not a light matter that in splitting tho forces that ought to stand unitedly opposed to tho extremists who are warring on the community Sm Joseph Ward is affording the latter' ail opportunity of obtaining on a minority vote representation in Parliament they could not otherwise hope to gain.

The result of his action, failing the readjustment which national interests demand, is to raise an obvious possibility that neither main party may secure a working majority in the new Parliament and that the extremists, even if they are not very numerous, may hold the balance of power. To allow such a state of affairs to arise would be to betray the country shamefully. Sir Joseph Ward must face the fact that from no higher motive than the hope of gratifying his own ambitions as a political leader and those of his party he is deliberately inviting conditions of representation in Parliament which would paralyse progressive effort in the Dominion. It is of vita! importance in this connection that the Onnosition Leader has thus far withheld an unequivocal assurance that lie would decline to take and bold office by grace of the Bolshevik element. Mn. Massey has stated explicitly that he would refuse to hold office, in such conditions. Sin Joseph Ward, though he stated at Christchurch that he "did not want extremists either from the Tory or the Labour side," has not yet given any such assurance.