THE COALITION

Hokitika Guardian, 27 November 1931, Page 3

THE COALITION

By X. There are no doubt many who are disappointed that the Premier did • not. decide to appeal to the country as 1 the ■National Liberal Party, having as he had at the back of him the traditions and records of the great Liberal Party with its famous leaders Sir' G. Grey, Ballance, Seddon and Ward. Atso his feaiiess and statesmanlike policy since he had taken office at a time of extreme national crisis 'had, gained him the. admiration and would have secured him the support of a large number of those who possibly had voted for the now somewhat nebulous “Reform.”

But the position in N.Z. is now and has been for some time past so very critical, and the events in Australia and in Great Britain were such an emphatic warning against allowing this country to run the slightest risk of falling under the domination of the sinister 'Socialist Communist forces masquerading as “Labour” that it was put p,-m'lnl.y to .Mr Forbes and Mr Coater that this was no time to let party cli 1 ferences stand in the way of the country’s safety. The Premier saw this at once, and by a broadminded gesture olfered to resign, with his colleagues if a National Government could be formed to deal. with the pressing problems that had to he solved. Mr Coates was more reluctant, but eventually fell into line. Your readers know how first an Economy Committee was formed rc .

presentative of' the three parties, and how eventually it was found that a coalition between the United and Reform parties to, stand unitedly against the Spciaiist-Communist Party was the only practicable solution. The danger that this would give the Socia:list-Cbm-munist Party the status of the official Opposition was not overlooked. It was also recognised that there would be an “Independent’’ section of Reformers and Uniteds who would not fa! 1 ..into. Ino bjfr would persist. ui vote ;splitting and thus endangering the direct issue whiejh is was imperative sfio.uM be placed before the people. This danger fs- with us, and it only remains to be proved whether the - good sense, of the people will overcome it, and demonstrate emphatically that the disaster which,; has overtaken N.S.W. shall not he repeated here. . . , . v . .• . ;

There has been no secrecy, or ■anything sinister in the way the. Coalition ; has been brought about. It has been accepted by both parties as the one practicable scheme for restoring the national finances and grappling with the jnsistani economic problems of the day. However, as might have been expected Mr Holland, in his opening campaign speech, said “the United Party had surrendered t«. the historic enemies, of the party led by Ballance and Seddon, and the last vestiges of the principles of rhe old Liberal-Labour, alliance, so far as the United Party was concerned, - had faded permanently into the shadows ot political intrigue.” Yet, in 1928, -during the short session which >, followed the-election, Mr Holland said .“he recognised there was no effective ..line of demarcation between ■ the Reform and United- Parties,■ and that the time must inevitably- arrive when the two .would come, together." • : - . The inconsistency of these' statements is. at once apparent; If there is,, as many people maintain, - no insuperable differences between United and Reform then it is all the more cred table to both sides that in a time of crisis and national emergency they should sink what differences there may be. There is nothing of “political intrigue” in this. v Now as a matter of fact Mr Holland and his party have not the slightest claim to be the legitimate successors to the Liberal Party. In the time of Mr Seddon there was no Labour Party or any Liberal-Labour .alliance in • the proper sense of the term. What -is known now as “Labour’’ was then the radical or .left-wing of the' Liberal ■Party/. It .was never loyal to th\j Liberals or trusted.,*by-'Mr. Seddon.;, It was later- op the direct cause of the Liberal Party; being- defeated. When Mr Holland makes political capital out. of what happened, to the country during the times of the Massey and Coates Governments the people must remember that- Mr Holland and his then small following of extremists were-the cause of that Government ; being placed in power.

Political fusions between Conservatives ■,and-Liberals*.have-not-been too .successful in the past, so far as New Zealand is concerned. There was the Bell-Se-well fusion An 1866 ; the Whittaker-Fox fusion in 1863: the Stout-Vogel combination in 1884; and'finally the Ward•rassey coalition during the wftri But there is now - '.every' reason to'believe ' h-f' the' people' 1 are ' getting"' heartily sick of the "vendetta as between' Ufiit'ed and Tie form. They will insist" later oil in going back to the' party labels with real meaning—Conservative and' Liberal. Then, as the fate Mr Massey claimed to be a Riberal, ’ and as Mr , Coates was first returned as a Liberal and a supporter of Sir Joseph .Ward they will want to know just "what the difference is which is causing the bitter antagonism between those calling themselves Reform and -those calling themselves United. If an. impartial tribunal were set up. to investigate these causes it would probably find they originated in miereovesentat’on and personal jealousy. Anyhow there will be time jialer on to find out whether the combination which has now started as a Coalition to meet and deal with a crisis in our history win consolidate into a permanent and : representative governing' body or whethej the ‘'Conservative and Liberal elements "•ill later separate out. The crisis is with us now and must be faced, therefore the party call is‘the nation’s call. Great Britain has given us a'lead ;and

'.S.W. has igiven us a warning j£ would he madness to neglect. .