International Whitlam tipped to defeat challenger

Press, 31 May 1977, Page 9

International Whitlam tipped to defeat challenger

NZPA Canberra rhe Australian Federal Opposition leader (Mr Gough Whitlam) is odds-on favourite to retain his leadership of the Parliamentary Labour Party today — but it is still likely to be one of the closest contests in the party’s history.

Supporters of both .Mr Whitlam and his sole challenger. Mr Bill Hayden, claim to have 28 firm votes — leaving either one only six or seven votes short of victory. This is out of the 62 caucus members who will decide the outcome. Mr Martin Nicholls, the South Australian member, who suffered a heart attack last year, is on indefinite Parliamentary leave and is not expected to attend.

But despite the closeness of the contest it has also been one of the quietest on record and possibly one of the most civilised. When Mr Hayden, who is 44, announced his decision to stand 11 weeks ago the stage appeared set for a prolonged and bitter campaign. The former Treasurer then was tipped as favourite to unseat Mr Whitlam, who is 60, now in his record tenth year as Parliamentary leader of the party. But soon after the challenge was announced the campaign appeared to fizzle out, but only after support for Mr Whitlam began to pour in, particularly from the unions — the grass roots of the party — and the Left-wing faction. The early challenge by Mr Hayden, therefore, could have been his undoing for the contest because since then Mr Whitlam has emerged as the firm favourite.

No-one in the party doubts Mr Whitlam’s skill as i a debater, his ability to[ counter-attack, his sense of history — but Mr Hayden is j offering the party something almost entirely different. While Mr Whitlam took Labour into office in 1972 after 23 years in the wilderness, his’ support has been declining since the dismissal by the Governor-General (Sir John Kerr) and the party’s subsequent defeat a month later in December, 1975.

Mr Hayden, on the other I hand, has been growing in stature with his grasp of i economics (he was one of (Mr Whitlam’s three Treasury ers) and apparent sincerity, i [ He lost some favour when! jhe declined to stand for . a! ; position on the front bench i after the 1975 defeat, but he ’has now become a powerful [force within the party. [ But it is apparent also [that if Mr Hayden was to [contest the leadership at any [stage in the future, he would [have had to make a stand 'against Mr Whitlam today. Failure to stand at this [election would have lost him [most of his present support I and he now 7 appears the

most likely successor to Mr Whitlam. if Mr Whitlam wins today, when he stands: down. Also to be decided by the Labour caucus today are the two other positions being; challenged — the denutyi leadership of Mr Tom Uren,! and the deputy leadership in' the Senate held by Senator' James Keefe. Mr Uren’s strongest chal-j lenge is likely to come from! Mr Paul Keating who went! within three votes of success at the last election 18 months] ago. Labour’s spokesman on ? Treasury matters, Mr Chris Hurford. is the second challenger for Mr Uren’s position. but few believe he has any chance at the moment. Mr Uren has strong Leftwing support within the party, but the most likely i outcome of both the leader-] ship and the deputy leader-1 ship is expected to result in the status quo—a contlnua- 1 - tion of the Whitlam-Uren: partnership. ; Senator Ken Wreidt’s 1 leadership in the Senate isij not being challenged, but the ] deputy’s position now 7 held j by Senator Keefe is being j widely tipped to go elsewhere. The Victorian senator, Mr L John Button, is a firm], favourite to replace Senator,; Keefe, with a further challenge from Senator Doug] McClelland. . But like the jostling for all|three positions to be de-|;

cided. there has been a sur-t prising lack of nublic lobby-1 ing. May caucus members be-] lieve "that the lobbying in the, past has done the Labour; Party more harm than good! and the “numbers game” this 1 time has been kept behind! closed doors. [1 It is also likely to be the[l last time that the leadership,l is up for grabs every 181‘ months. ii The 18-month vote was in- ’ serted into caucus rules after 1 the 1975 defeat, but there ap-[] pears to be general agree-., ment now that the party cannot afford a possible leadershin disruption every) 18 months no matter how f quietly it is done, [