THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES TUESDAY, JULY 29, 1919. THE POLITICAL OUTLOOK.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17689, 29 July 1919, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES TUESDAY, JULY 29, 1919. THE POLITICAL OUTLOOK.

Our "two leaders," the Prime Minister and the Minister,of Finance, returning next week from Europe and the Peace Conference, will, it is to bo feared, come back as they set forth, an ill-assorted pair. They have been companions in travel, crossing the ocean to and fro as fellow passengers; bnt there seems to be little likelihood that this physical propinquity will have brought them closer in feeling. Far from that, it may have driven them further apart. Enforced contact may have put a new edge on old animosities and old rivalries. • Nor is it in the least probable that a change of heart will have been wrought by their association in the work of the Peace Congress. The official reporter, superfluously attached to the delegation from New Zealand, hag kept the limelight full and strong on the Prime Minister in the seats of the mighty, whilst his colleague, flitting dubious among the stage supernumeraries, has been shown to us by side-lights only, and at uncertain intervals. Perhaps this is as it should be. The Prime Minister is the Prime Minister, whoever may be associated with him in any particular mission. Moreover, a truth surmised here—that the Peace Congress had neither use nor room for a second New Zealand representative:—becanw unpleasantly clear in Paris. On the whole there is no reason to think that the two Ministers come back to us in closer relations than when they went away or more amiably disposed towards each other.

Only because of its political consequences does this fact concern the public. Amongst members of Parliament it scorns to be assumed that old party divisions axe forthwith to be restored; that there is to bo no further pretence of a roturn to tho fabled time when "none was for a party and all were for tho State"; that tho union of hearts, under pretext of which Parliament was tolerated in extending its' life beyond tho legal limit, has ceased to exist, or rather that it never existed; that the name "National Government" was more camouflage; and that now we come back to reality and the normal. As heretofore, tho " two leaders" are to lead in different directions, each going off with his own flock of devotees; and in this posture Parliament is to face a general election. Intelligent patriots are expected to acquiesce in a position intrinsically absurd for the reason that the Prime Minister and tho Minister of Finance will not work together, and that each has his own plighted following. No political differences of any moment separate them. They hold virtually tho same political principles, including tho principle of the village priest who would rather bo first at Caen than second in Rome. Neither will serve under tho other. As things with Labour candidates offering by tho score, each the facsimile of Messrs Semplo, Fraser, and Holland, an illustrious trio of members of Parliament, this obstinate rivalry is the short way to political suicide. Worse than that, it is a betrayal of the country. The Ministers themselves being beyond reach of expostulation, some plain speaking may be suitably addressed to the members of Parliament. In New Zealand as elsewhere perilous times are threatening. There is need of a united front, of a league of all honest men, against the public enemy—Boche or Bolshevist. Members of Parliament who consent to be herded and paddocked like sheep that they may gratify the unreasoning ambition and childish vanity of a party leader are unworthy of their place and pay. Party loyalty when it brings them to this pass is an outworn superstition. It is time to talk of loyalty to the country. If it is expedient that in a political sense one man should die for the people—or two men, since two men are in question—let the sacrifice be made. The rank and file of the Liberal and Reform parties, so called, when urged to combine against the common enemy cannot move, they tell us, without permission of the incompatible and irreconcilable "two leaders," of whose authority they speak with bated breath. This is to profess themselves in the preposterous servitude of Sindbad when bestridden and possessed by the Old Man of the, Sea. Failing the courage to emancipate themselves, the rank and file will be accomplices in the betrayal of the country. It is not the Labour Party in the broad sense that is the common enemy, but Bolshevism—we need not shrink from tho word. There is no reason why the Labour Party should not have its turn | of power as soon as it is fit for power that is, when the Labour Party, too, has deposed its present leaders and learned wisdom. But criminal ineptitude, amounting to a betrayal of''the country on the part of our " two leaders" and their followers, may have the effect of putting it in the saddle before .its time.