SOUTH AFRICAN TOUR ROW Why Rugby And Not Trade?

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31986, 13 May 1969, Page 19

SOUTH AFRICAN TOUR ROW Why Rugby And Not Trade?

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON.

The immediate past chairman of the New Zealand Rugby Union, Mr T. C. Morrison, said he could not see why sporting links should be singled out for criticism by opponents of New Zealand’s relationship with South Africa.

Sport was not the only link between New Zealand and South Africa —trade, diplomatic and Parliamentary exchanges were regularly made, Mr Morrison said at a Rotary luncheon in Wellington.

“Why should sport be singled out and such links severed?

"Isolating our long established ties in sport and breaking them, as some are trying to do, is entirely illogical. unreasonable and unfair while other links remain.” In a troubled and imperfect world, sport was one of the greatest instruments for promoting understanding and advancing human progress, because it aroused the in-

terest of all and could pass over seemingly insurmountable barriers, he said. “In my experience of life, you achieve nothing by turning your back on a man or an idea you don’t agree with.” First Invitation Mr Morrison said an invitation was received to tour South Africa in 1967, but without Maoris, and the union decided the invitation could not be accepted. “There is some impression that the opposition to the tour came from only outside the realm of Rugby administration, but there were many deep-thinking and sincere men at all levels of Rugby administration who quite independently held the view that no Maori player good enough for selection should be left out of any New Zealand team.” It was 15 months later than an amended invitation, which included Maoris, was received and accepted, because the N.Z.R.F.U, considered the earlier objection had been removed, he said. “Now I am called on to justify the union’s decision. But I think no justification is called for because when a condition for a future arrangement is met, then you must carry out the arrangement.” He did not question the right of individuals to express views if they were seriously and conscientiously held. Changed Attitude But it was unfortunate those who had earlier been associated with the “No Maoris, No Tour” group did not declare themselves from the start and say straight out that their real object was to use Rugby to show their objection to the racial policy of the South African Government, he said. “Most of those who now object were associated earlier in 1967 with the move to abandon that tour.” Sportsmen and sports bodies had a corresponding right to object to their sport being used as an instrument to oppose the policies of the South African Government he said. Both the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) had expressed, on behalf of their parties, opposition to the policy of apartheid, but at the same time both had declared with equal firmness that the Rugby tour should take place next year. “Similarly, Cardinal McKeefry, Catholic Metropolitan of New Zealand, had said the tour should proceed, though adding his disapproval of South African policy in general. “The opinions of these three leaders are free from emotionalism—they are practical, common-sense views,” said Mr Morrison.