MR COATES REPLIES

Hokitika Guardian, 6 May 1931, Page 6

MR COATES REPLIES

AUCKLAND, May 0. In a statement reniragdi ? i Jn a statement regarding the question of fusion, which lias been handed to the Prime Minister, by the Leader of the Deform Party, Mr Coates says : “You will readily understand that, an answer to your proposals for the elimination of the Reform Party and the United Party and the formation of a new Party has demanded from me as grave and careful consideration as I do that on doubt you gave your offer before making it. The Reform Party has accepted, without reserve, your assurance that , your suggestion is die-, tated with no view to personal or Party advantage, and is made in what 'you consider-the- best-interest of the country. And 1 ask you to- believe that the Reform Party,, in refusing at this late stage in the life of .the pre-. sent 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 National 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, wJien its policy ceaaies to command public approval; or, if it wishes to change its declared policy, must, consult the electors. If this sound rule is to he relaxed, it must he done by the electors, and no one else—no offer of office — will induce us to join ill an attempt to remove from the electors this right, especially when, at so early a date as next November, the future policy of the country will he determined by them. • ' ’ "U

i “Avowedly the bond between the United Party, the Labour rarty and the Independents, which enabled the United Party to gain and retain office, ws?!? fife if t-OTffmW 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 arc converted to the policy we have advocated, but because the Labour Party is dissatisfied with your policy. Those who are asking that all of the available forces be ranged against Labour are influenced by a fear or 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, calling into being for a reason which will influence every step it takes. The Reform Party seeks to represent, not a section of, hut the whole people—not the country or the ciy, but the country and the city—not the employer or the employee, but the employer and the employee. The course you suggest would, in our opinion, .set up a class Government, and create a -definite separation in politics between employee and employer which would he disastrous to New Zealand. The application of the term to such a, party is misleading,'andwould react' against those sheltering under it. While I appreciate the good faith which dictated your statement,: I can’t 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, has a record of service in office ancf out of office of which its adherents are proud, 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 seurce the stability and harmony so essential to strong Governments, and you must know that the piroposed new Party would contain none of the elements of stability or harmony, and al lthe seeds of inefficiency. 1 ho my mind, the suggested party would mean to the country a great loss and little gain, inasmuch as at the present time a Party, to be effective, must be knit in the closest agreement on principle and policy. A Ministry of expediency, chosen as suggested by members elected on different programmes, would command in tlie House neither confidence nor loyalty ; and, iii my opinion, would inevitably suffer from disruption. ‘lt would he grossly unfair, on my part, to allow you and your Cabinet to resign their portfolios in a belief iduced by the recent comparative absence of criticism in matters of administration, apart from known differences on major policy measures, that vour administration has been such as

to command from our Party. Any substantial degree of confidence in the ad-

TO OFFER OF MR FORBES © A FUSION DECLINED ATTITUDE OF REFORM PARTY Q (By Telegraph—Per Press Association)

ministrative abilities of Ministers, Sir Joseph Ward’s long illness, your own absence at the Imperial Conference, and tire necessity we have been under, lately, to assist you in your economy measures, stilling criticism for the time being, may have misled you into an assumption of a wider range of agreement than actually obtains. Any misconception of this nature would ultunatdly lead to internal ;recriminations, which must provoke discord and prevent harmonious co-operation. “In conclusion, we think it is in the host interests of the country mat the assistance you are entitled to ask of us should he 'given on the lines traditionally adopted, and so far followed by ns. The Reform Party Has made it clear in the session just dosed that it will support such measures of economy and finance as the present crisis demands. We recognise your responsibility to balance your budget, and will offer n 0 factious opposition to such measures as may he necessary to attain that object.

‘‘.lf further help is required, not merely in the House, but in the preparation of legislation, 1 am prepared, in the public interest, if you so wish, to furnish a small committee of Reform members to confer with your ’Ministers before legislation is introduced. If you agree with my proposals, it should bo reasonably possible to safeguard the interest of the people in the present period of economic straits, and to carry on the government of the country until the time when the electors ill decide for themselves the policy and the Government the country desires.”

FEELING IN WELLINGTON.WELLINGTON. May 4, There is a feeling that the proposal of the Prime Minister is not viewed altogether favourably bv members of the Reform Party, and a suggestion has been made that a reply has already been drafted by the party declining agree to the suggestion that a National Government should he formed. It is stated that members of the Reform Party are afraid that there is a'.“(nigger in the wood pile” so far as the overtures made by Mr Forbes are concerned. The belief is held that should a joint meeting of the parties be held to discuss the question of leadership, Mr Forbes, would be speeded, despite the fact that the Reform Par! y is numerically stronger that the United Party. The invitation of the Prime Minister .applies to the Independent members of the House just as much as it applies to the Reform Party, and there is a feeling in the ranks of the Reform Party that a ballot for the of leader would go against Mr Coates. In short, the Independents, who now number seven, hol ( | the key to the position, and the Reform Party is* not altogether willing to risk the possible loss of its identity.

Prneticnlly all the Independent members were elected as straight-out opponents of Mr Coates, and it is not considered likely that they would turn round and support him as Prime ATinister in._the event of the formation of a National Government. On the other hand, it is known that ..several of tinindependents are hv no. means enamoured of Air Forbes, and it is on the cards that in the event of a National Party being formed an effort would he made to go outside the present leaders and eleet somebody else, as lender. Although the Independents disehim that they have n«v party organisation, the member for F.gmont, ATr C. A. Wilkinson) is regarded as the leader of the group, and a move may he made to place him at the head of any new party. It is very doubtful, however, whether he would command ani erreat support from the United and Reform Parties.

It is also stated that members of t.K Reform Party are not unanimous in the opinion that Air Coates should he called on to lead the country again. Certain members of the Reform Party, is is stated, would have preferred to have had a definite offer from Air Forties of six seats in the O-abiimt. and it reported that a selection has already been made of possible Cabiivt Ministers. These would include Air Coates, the Hon. W. Down.ie Stewart (Dunedin AVest), Air K. S. AViUinms (Bay of Plenty), ATr D. Jones (ATidCanterhury), an ( i Air W. P. Endean (Parnell).