THE UNITED POLITICAL PARTY.

Evening Star, Issue 19786, 9 February 1928, Page 6

THE UNITED POLITICAL PARTY.

The new United Political Party emerged a little more definitely into the daylight at a meeting held in Auckland last night. But it was a blinking emergence, like that of an owl which Juts been nurtured in darkness, rather than a full-eyed confronting. Mr G, W. Forbes appeared as tho “present political head of the party,” which for some months alter its obscure inception, in August last, in Auckland, seems to have been a body without a head. Three months ago, however, it was reported that tho United New Zealand Political Organisation (to recall the first name given to it) had decided to merge with tho National Party, and some piquancy was given to tho speculation as to which had swallowed which. Mr Forbes, however, is at present the leader of the new United Party, presumably including his Nationalists, though the qualification given to his leadership would suggest that it has not yet advanced beyond a stage of transition. That was suggested more emphatically by the limitations of Mr Forbes's address. He declined to answer questions, and deferred any detailed statement of the objects of the new combination till the election campaign opens, presumably about October next. There is a great Icisureliuess about this new organisation. It has more claims to the name (United Party) than it had six months ago, when its use of the title “United” expressed chiefly an aspiration, but it has a long way yet to go before all the sections that dislike the Government, except Socialist Labor, can be combined in its ranks. To give it the power it desires Mr Forbes must show livelier energy than he did, as leader of the Nationalists, before the last election. We do not recall that he addressed then a single meeting outside of his own electorate. His speech at Auckland does not seem to have been of the kind that fires a people with tho conviction that a new vision of progress and wisdom and difficulties made as stubble has been displayed to it. He assailed the Government as hundreds have been doing—that was easy—and he set forth his ideas lor the future in terms that suffered obviously from the fact that no detailed programme has yet been agreed on by tho new party. Tho needs of the country to-day were pronounced to be five in number. First among them was a vigorous land settlement policy. That is much to be desired, but it has to be harmonised with a condition ol the times in which one of the greatest difficulties is to keep people on the land who are already there. The second need was declared to be “fostering, without spoon-feeding;’ worth-while secondary industries a sound policy, but not nearly so explicit as could be required. Careful control by Parliament of the national expenditure is undoubtedly a prime necessity, but preferential voting threatens its own difficulties. Mr Forbes was most original in the last requirement he laid down; we have never seen it called for before in a politician’s address, but thousands of others will feel sympathy with his demand lor a “legislative rest.” Mr Forbes himself, however, must not rest while he retains his leadership. His party docs not yet include Mr Veitch’s Liberals. Wo have no knowledge of their number outside of Parliament, but it is mot many mouths since Mr Veitch was stumping tho country, presumably in quest of followers. Accessions from Reform have been hoped for, and even claimed, by the new United organisation, but other Reformers in tbe north have preferred to throw in their lot with the Country Party. Labor is for the present the only undivided political communion. There were signs that it formed the bulk of the attendance at Mr Forbes's meeting. Jt has reason to anticipate real advantages for itself, at the next triennial polls, from the multiplicity of parties.