THE FEDERAL CRISIS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 104, 31 May 1909, Page 4

THE FEDERAL CRISIS

POINTS OF DIFFERENCE. ATTEMPT TO REPRODUCE TWOPARITY SYSTEM.

Under the three-party system, the last Deakini Government held office with the Support of the Labor party. That support being withdrawn, the Deakin Government fell in November last, and the Labor (Fisher) Government succeeded. 'Now the Labor Government lias fallen, but by a new process—the. fusion of the other two parties, which aims at reducing Parliament 'to a two-iparty statiw —•that is to say, the change, if enduring, is radical.. The burning question in 'Australia, for weeks has been whether 'Messrs. Deakin and Cook can reconcile | their differences to the extent of running in double harness with any prospect of permanence. What are the points of difference! According to the AiiV-tf mil May:

"It is understood that the points of policy which must be settle! on lines laid down by Mr. Deakin if he is to take office relate to protection generally, the new protection, compulsory military traiiifiig, and Federal and State finance relations. Mr. Deakin cannot sink the fiscal issue in any manner that would prevent him from remedying (i.i a protectionist sense) the many anomalies in the Lvne tariff of 1907. He insists on a genuine new protection amendment to the Constitution, enabling some Federal authority to harmonise wiages boards', regulations affecting protected industries, and no supply a code where no States wages boards exiet. He does not propose to go beyond protected industries, but he declares that on. the principle involved there is no room for compromise. On the compulsory training question, Mr. Deakin insiats that any scheme which 'lie ils 'to support must include the 'training off young men between eighteen.and twenty-one, instead of stopping short with the cadet*, as Mr. Cook's friends propose. Here, again, there fe little room for compromise. As to the Federal finance difference;.', it is 'difficult to give precise particulars. Generally speaking, Mr. Joseph Cook is a 'State" rights man,' and, according to .some members, he would make concessions to the Premiers in connection with the future distribution of the Customs revenue which Mr. Dea.kin could never endorse. Mr.DeaUln deems ft his duty to, conserve the supremacy of the Federation by every legitimate means."