THE LABOUR PARTY CONFERENCE PARTY EAGER TO ADVANCE ELECTION PREPARATIONS

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31676, 11 May 1968, Page 12

THE LABOUR PARTY CONFERENCE PARTY EAGER TO ADVANCE ELECTION PREPARATIONS

(By a ttaff corrtipondont of "Th* Pr«s*"J

The annual conference of the Labour Party this week frequently assumed the air of a pre-election conference. It was not merely the call by Mr Kirk, as Parliamentary leader, for the immediate resignation of the Government, nor the appearance on the platform of most of the 42 Parliamentary candidates for Labour already selected that inspired this feeling.

Remits calling on the Parliamentary party to investigate issues “when it became the Government” did not satisfy many delegates. They sought immediate investigation so that proposals for action might be included in next year’s election manifesto.

Willingness among delegates to overthrow existing policy—as on membership of S.E.A.T.O. and on broadcasting—and to quertion whether past policy had been sufficiently specific, made this conference very different from the last assembly of delegates. Last year, the 1986 manifesto went unchallenged. Awareness bf the need to run a new kind of election campaign also pervaded this conference. The success of byelection campaigns last year, in which emphasis was laid on direct, personal approaches to electors, prompted many appeals to delegates to ensure that the lower echelons of the party equipped themselves to publicise the policy. Some members had simply not understood the party’s policy in 1966, Mr Kirk told the conference. He had been surprised and appalled that one or two candidates, after the last election, had freely said that the Labour Party had no economic policy at all. Either the candidates’ conference had not been sufficient or they did not pay attention. “We are planning to have two, perhaps three, candi dates’ conferences on the policy,” he said. Regional conferences would also be held to discuss local issues. All new candidates should become familiar with debates in Parliament. The party executive prom ised to supply more information to branches and Labour representation committees so that their members could con Vey the party's message. Use Of “Experts” The success of this confere -ce suggested that the 1969 conference might have to do little more than tidy up its ideas for the next General Election manifesto. However, the conference has given the Parliamentary party a huge task to discharge before May. 1969. More than 250 recommendations were on the remit paper this year. The multiplicity of remits demonstrated the difficulty of at once ensuring that all local proposals reach the national level of the party and of ensuring that each is adequately discussed. Almost every complicated proposal was referred to the Parliamentary party for investigation. While the conference remains an Important initiator of policy and an advocate of general Ideas, it bequeathes to the Parliamentary party an enormous task of inquiry and detailed formulation of policy. The conference this week heard several appeals from the floor for some formal arrangement to enlist outside help for the Parliamentarians, especially from authorities on the subjects embraced by the remits. University delegates were strong advocates of this scheme to introduce "experts” to the highest policy-making levels of the party. The party’s president, Mr N. V Douglas, resisted the proposal, assuring Its advocates that the policy committee and Parliamentarians would seek advice whenever they thought it necessary. The contribution of the youth branches, the university branches, and of young delegates from affiliated unions and branches has become an accepted part of the conference. Less often than before did the • speeches of young members of the party at this conference arouse the impatience of some older delegates. Next year the party executive will probably propose that the Youth Movement have a seat on the executive. Maori Seats In his report from the Parliamentary party, Mr Kirk repeated his views on the abolition of the Maori electorates “When Maoris are freely contesting European electorates, and are being freely elected, then the time will come to talk with the Maori people about whether they want separate representation or not," he said. Later, the Maori policy committee went straight to the heart of this question. “We ought not allow any other political party to beat Labour in returning a Maori from a European electorate,” said Mr R. Love, chairman of the Maori policy committee. The conference accepted his recommendation “that more candidates of half-caste and more Maori blood, who possess the appropriate qualifications, be given more consideration than has hitherto been evident to contest established Labour seats.” Mr Kirk was quick to re mind delegates that the party executive could not carry out this recommendation. “We want to see Maoris earning forward and being elected,” he said. “But if the national president or the national executive took it on themselves to appoint a candidate in any electorate there would be a civil war in this conference. The responsibility is yours." The party must clearly prac tise what it preached, he said. Foreign Policy Mention of Vietnam was almost entirely absent from

this year’s debates. The constitutional prohibition against the repetition of business of the last conference virtually excluded remits on Vietnam. The statement of the Joint Council of Labour the party’s policy on Vietnam was, of course, reaffirmed; but without discussion. An amendment to a remit concerning New Zealand troops in Malaysia almost widened the debate to Include Vietnam. The amendment proposed the immediate withdrawal of New Zealand force* from the whole of the Southeast Asia area. The conference rejected this amendment.

Mr Kirk’s strong appeal for flexibility in foreign policy and Sir Walter Nash’s urging that a Labour Government’s hands not be tied disposed of an awkward proposal that Labour should not enter into an agreement to increase New Zealand forces in Malaysia. The passing of such a proposal would have required the party to condemn any such agreement made at the defence conference in Kuala Lumpur next month. This would have been at odds with Labour’s previous readiness to assist Malaysia by keeping troops there, though only as long as they are wanted by the Malayasians.

Mr Kirk made plain his displeasure at the conference’s rejection of New Zealand participation in 5.E.A.T.0.. However, the conference decision on S.E.A.T.O. should not be too embarrassing: almost in the same breath it affirmed the party policy on regional defence pacts. The policy calls for a revision of the treaty. F.O.L. In Politics The president of the Federation of Labour, Mr T. E. Skinner, was warmly applauded for his speech to the conference, although it must have left many delegates baffled. On the surface it was a call for unity in policy and action; at the same time, Mr Skinner was suggesting that the two organisations had left their opponents—the National Party and the newspapers—too much room to speak of a split between the F.O.L. and the Labour Party. "We must have a common policy, common ideals; and, if we can hammer out something that no-one can break asunder, we need not fail,” he said. “If we have our differences —be it on Vietnam or anything else—let us have them. But in the final analysis let us come out with one voice and say: This is what we want”

Mr Skinner reviewed the F.O.L.’s efforts to persuade the Government to change its economic policies. "Attack us as you will—the newspapers will do that—for entering politics, we are not going to sit back while the country

drifts in and out of inflation and deflation,” said Mr SHhner. Many of the federation's proposals, first dismissed by the Prime Minister as wild dreams, had now been enacted by the Government, ha Mid.

Mr Skinner Mid that in 1966 the Prime Minister had spent half his time persuading people that the F.O.L. was the Labour Party, that Tom Skinner was Norman Kirk, and that Norman Kirk was Tom Skinner. Although Mr Skinfier urged recognition of the separate roles of the two organisations, he called for more frequent meetings of the Joint Council of Labour. This evoked loud applause from the conference, which had been told earlier by the party secretary, Mr A. J. McDonald, that the council met only once last year. Mr McDonald said there was no need for additional formal meetings between the leaders of the two organisations: they were in constant consultation, and officers of the federation were invited to attend the Parliamentary caucus and the policy committee when industrial matters were being discussed . “Real” Unity The response to Mr Skinner’s appeal suggested that many delegates felt consultations might concern more than industrial affairs. The conclusion of Mr Skinner’s speech confirmed that he, too, was ready to engage in the closest possible co-operation with the party to replace the Government.

The federation wanted to get rid of the Government, said Mr Skinner, and because the Labour Party was the only Opposition that could replace the present Government the federation turned to the Labour Party.

Thanking Mr Skinner for his address, Mr Douglas reminded the conference of the distinction between the party and the federation. “Mr Skinner was a little hesitant to say that the Federation of Labour is political,” he said. “This is the political organisation of the movement. Heaven help the National Party if the federation becomes political.” Mr Skinner, replying to this comment repeated his call for unity: "We want a new look at a situation that we have let develop for too long,” he said. A recent newspaper editorial had referred to a facade of unity between the party and the federation; that facade must be made a reality, he said. Only two changes were made among the 23 party officer* elected by the conference. The 364 delegates attending the conference represented 48 Labour Representation Committees with 96 votes, 13 interbranch councils (13 votes), 244 branches (258 votes), 55 affiliated unions (422 votes), and the Maori policy committee (three votes).