“UNITED PARTY IS EFFETE”

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 870, 14 January 1930, Page 1

“UNITED PARTY IS EFFETE”

Mr. Jenkins warmly supported the view expressed by Mr. Davy that the United and Reform Parties should cone together to prevent the country passing under the domination of Labour. The statement made by Mr. Davy cannot be treated lightly, said Mr. Jenkins. Big things may hinge on it. He said, that there had been no collaboration between Mr. Davy and himself and he had not seen or communicated with the party organiser since he was last in Wellington. In fact he did net know where the party officers were, and had had no private conversation or communication with Mr. Davy for at least six months. Mr. Jenkins said that he wanted to be loyal to his party, but he could not ciose his eyes to obvious weaknesses and faults. He was one of the few really independent members of the party, and was financially independent as well. Personally he would sooner withdraw from politics altogether than allow things to be buried that should be opposed. Many of our members and some of bur Ministers are quite efficient, said Mr. Jenkins. For instance, he considered that Mr. Stallworthy was thoroughly efficient. These men were working well but, although reluctant to say it, he felt the party was being greatly hindered by its leader. The caucus meetings were Just a farce and the rank of the party soon learned that it would have very little say in the putting of the party’s policy into force, and very little opportunity of voicing their opinions in the House unless at the rink of becoming frightfully unpopular, said Mr. Jenkins. At the start the local organisation tonsisted mostly of dissatisfied Reformers. “1 felt that I was Joining a United Party,” continued Mr. Jenkins, ‘ but 1 soon found out that it was the intention of the leader of the party to fill, his Cabinet with Liberals, and he did so with one exception. Many others like myself felt that we had been misled into entering a party that was United in name only. SOUTH ISLAND CONTROL

In reply to Mr. Davy, Sir Joseph "Ward has stated that the party had many caucuses, but all the caucuses the party had had could be counted on the fingers on one hand. The first was demanded by certain members, all of whom are in the Auckland Province, to urge that the Government should reconsider its decision regarding railway policy, but they were told by their leaders that the was not going to be a caucus party. At one caucus he urged in regard to the South Island railway construction that before the work should be proceeded with an inquiry into it should be made and this immediately raised a storm of criticism from South Island members. The control o£ the P art 2, practically in the South Island, added Mr. Jenkins. . He was quite convinced that his party had not gained sufficient ground lo go back with a working majority, unless with the: assistance of Labour, and did not think the country was ready to take Reform back. He thought the only solution was the fusion of the best elements of the Deform and United Parties, including also the Independent members, some pi whom were very able men and quite capable of taking Cabinet rank. Otherwise he thought the country ■would pass under the control of a 1-abour Government, and he thought an tn restricted Labour Government in New Zealand would do incalculable harm. His principal objection to Labour was the fact that very few- of its members had had to handle big finance, and vt:ry few had to employ labour on a large scale, and in such a way as to show profit for capital in'ested. In the Government employees would be represented but not employers. Without employers you cannot have employees,” added Mr. Jenkins.

Government Member Alarmed MUST HAVE NEW BLOOD Labour’s View On Fusion “THE Luited Party is practically effete and unless new I b'ood is added it will drift and fall,” said Mr. H. R. Jenkins, United member for Parnell, in an interview with The Sun this morning. “T am sorry to have to admit that Mr. A. E. Davy’s statement is unfortunately true, but when I went on to the platform I promised I would oppose all wrong and support those things that were right. lam sorry that I have to criticise the party and its leader, but I have a duty to my constituents.” A Labour view of the political crisis was expressed this morning by Mr. W. ,T. Jordan, M.P. for Manukau, who gave an indication of Labour’s attitude on the question of the suggested fusion of the United Party with Reform. He also explained why Labour had supported the new Government during" the late session.

"This, country, with its big external debt, has .to depend upon its exports to pay its interest. Labour would attempt to establish Governmentcontrolled industries, and would put on high protective tariffs to enable these to pay. In my opinion there is only one end to that, and that is bankruptcy. Australia is facing that position. I am an advocate of free trade within the Empire, and unless we let the British goods that are manufactured from our raw products into this country free from duty, how can England ever be in a position to purchase our raw products and dairy produce? “I think we would also find that our credit at Home would suffer,” said Mr. Jenkins. “The Government at Home I do not regard as a Labour Government, but a minority party in control.” Unless a party had a good working majority it was useless. There was too much room lor debaters and sessions were_ unduly prolonged. There was also a tendency for the Government to pass legislation introduced by Labour in order to gain its support in keeping on the Treasury benches. The Rent Restriction Bill was an instance, added Mr. Jenkins. TO KEEP IN WITH LABOUR "The acquiescence of the Prime Minister to the payment of standard rates of wages to relief workers was also done to gain the support of the Labour Party,” said Mr. Jenkins. “This was without any consideration to the real merits of the proposal. No Government can afford to pay wages at an uneconomic price. It was equivalent to giving 14s a day to men who could only earn 55.”

Questioned as to the possibility of fusion between the Reform and United Parties. Mr. Jenkins said he considered it most desirable in the interests of the country. “And, after ail, there is very little difference in our political views and aspirations,” he added. “The great stumbling block to fusion,” he remarked, “was the old question of price. So many men wanted to know- where they came in when the portfolios were being distributed. instead of being: content to work as a member in the interests of their country and constituencies. Personally, I have never sought Cabinet rank, and am quite content to work for my constituency as an ordinary member. “Unfortunately many of the members need the extra money. That is the tragedy of the whole thing. There is continual working and pulling for Cabinet rank. A Cabinet Minister told me that I should look after myself a bit more, and that some men would give thousands to have ‘honourable’ in front of their names. I certainly have no desire for that sort of thing,” remarked Mr. Jenkins. Personally, he thought that no man was capable of being a Minister un-