COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL PARTY MEETINGS WILL TEST NATIONAL’S FUTURE POLICIES

Press, Volume CXIII, Issue 33230, 21 May 1973, Page 12

COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL PARTY MEETINGS WILL TEST NATIONAL’S FUTURE POLICIES

(From our Parliamentary reporter)

WELLINGTON, May 20.—The Labour movement lias had its season and now it is the turn of the National Party. South Island divisions held their annual meetings this week-end and the North Island divisions will follow suit next week-end. No one is pretending that the mood is entirely happy.

Coming after a cosy, but alert Latour Party conference and a great show of unity between the party and the Federation of Labour, the National Party has to make up a lot of ground.

The party has already been through a good deal of soulsearching at various levels. At national level the Parliamentary party has grouped itself into committees with a full-time employed secretariat to provide research material, and the executive is looking into the need (or otherwise) of changes in the organisational structure and the selection of candidates. The results of these investigations are to go before the next meeting of the Dominion Council of the party in September. The party administrators will hope that a definitive course will be plotted then so that they can make any changes necessary well before they need to prepare for the next General Election. Contest for president Also, at national level, but something which the meetings this week-end and next will set the scene for, will be the contest for the presidency of the party. Two years ago, at a time when the party — both at Parliamentary and grassroots level — was waiting for Sir Keith Holyoake to make up his mind when he would hand over to Mr Marshall, Mr G. A. Chapman challenged Mr E. D. Holt for the presidency. Such a challenge was unheard of in the party, which had seen only two contests for the presidency in its history before, both of them when a sitting president had retired.

It was mounted against a background of declining membership and uncertain finances. Sir Keith Holyoake’s delay in announcing his intentions, and the barely suppressed struggle between Mr Marshall and Mr Muldoon for the leadership had cut deeply into party morale. Resentment reflected The challenge also reflected resentment that the Parliamentary party had seemed to have become a law unto itself, largely ignoring conference decisions, and an im-

patience of younger members of the party at what was felt i to be an out-of-date style of administration by Mr Holt and the long-serving general director, Mr R. F. Wilson. Mr Chapman, a cool, selfmade chartered accountant, is [expected to be nominated again by Wellington and starts with both the advantage of having trod the path before, and the disadvantages of having by his previous challenge got a reputation in some quarters for impetuosity and brashness, and of having been chairman of the publicity committee in a losing campaign last year. Mr Chapman’s main opponent is thought by many party observers to be Mr S. Masters, the bluff chairman of the Auckland division who is regarded as less of an enthusiast for change than Mr Chapman. There were abortive moves in 1971 to try and enter him in the race (which he denied any part of) and Auckland votes for Mr Holt may have been decisive. But although Auckland was the least unsuccessful of the divisions last November in terms of seats won or lost, Mr Masters’s appeal outside his own group of Auckland supporters may not be great. There remains the possibility that a lesser-known contender could come through the middle. One name being mentioned in Wellington is that of Mr D. J. Ewert, the deputy chairman of the Wai-] kato division. He would start with the advantage over the other two of not having made enemies. Policy changes The debate over the presidency will centre to a large extent on the personalities involved. But at least part of the consideration of the issue will be in terms of how much change the various candidates are likely to promote. In this, Mr Chapman starts with a reputation of urging fairly far-reaching change. There are reports that as the 1972 General Election re-

cedes from memory and the Labour Government settle; down to the more mundani aspects of administration there is less enthusiasm ii

the party for change for its own sake. 1 There is a school of thought which argues that modifications (as opposed to deep-seated changes) may be enough, coupled with a certain disenchantment in the electorate at some of the Government’s actions, to swing the National Party back into power in 1978, or [even in 1975. I This is reminiscent of the Labour Party’s attitude in the 19505, when indeed it did regain power, in 1957. It took till about the mid-1960s before the Labour Party really began to contemplate the sort of fundamental changes in outlook that helped it to the decisive victory of last year. New blood sought But there are signs that some in the National Party are looking beyond a simple return to power and want the party to redefine its policies and bring in new blood at the [Parliamentary level before it [regains power. I South Islanders have made |it clear to the party headi quarters that they thought [ the ousted Government should have offered much more to the electorate on regional development to try and combat Labour’s pledges and to stem the onrushing tide of Labour victories in the island. One remit to the Canterbury Division’s meeting this week-end called on the party to urge the new Government to put its irrigation policy into effect quickly.

Those who formed the bulk of “pol-link,” the ginger group of youngish urban liberals like Julian Watts and John Marshall, sons of National Party Cabinet Ministers, who tried to influence the leadership towards less conservative thinking on matters such as abortion and law and order, are regrouping. Much is expected to be heard from them at the Wellington meeting next week-end. And at the bottom, there is a stirring among “young Nationals.” A congress of 30 of them at Wanganui last week-end chided the leadership and those in positions of power in the organisation for paying them too little attention.

They resolved to come out from their youth branches—where they have a reputation for being social, rather than political, beings—and take an active part in the ordinary branches.

In spite of the fact that they were influential in the conference decision of last year against votes at 18, activist “Young Nationals” are generally to the left of the party as a whole. Many of them are in tune with much that the Labour Party has promised to do, but remain in the National Party because they have been brought up to it or because it is the party they first joined. Their agitation is unlikely to move the leaders much at this stage, especially in view of their small numbers. But they have learned the lesson of the impact young people were able to make on the Labour Party through painstaking work in study groups and at the conference.

The question that faces the National Party in the long term is whether it can attract people in the 20-30 age group which now seems to be motivated more strongly by the greater social consciousness of the Labour Party. It took Labour until the late 1960 s before it really began to do so and by then it had been virtually 15 years out of office. The meetings this week-end and next will give an indication of how deep the National Party is prepared to go in its search for the grass roots support if needs for a real swing ba r ' to power.