‘To hell with them,' says P.M. of N.Z.’s critics

Press, 10 June 1977, Page 3

‘To hell with them,' says P.M. of N.Z.’s critics

NZPA Sydney The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) made front-page news in Australia yesterday with remarks interpreted as anti-Australian. Many New Zealanders were saying “to hell” with those who were “getting at them,” Mr Muldoon said, according to the Sydney “Sun” newspaper.

Early editions of the “Sun” carrier the story over five columns of its front page under the heading: “Go to hell!”

The report, later relegated to page 3, carried a secondary heading: “Muidoon fires ■savage salvo at Australia.”

Billboards at news-stands throughout Sydney said: “N.Z. P.M. blasts Aussies.”

The report quoted Mr Muldoon’s reaction to differences of opinion with the Australian Prime Minister (Mr Fraser) about apartheid, regionalism, and the gap between rich and poor nations. “New Zealand’s Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) today virtually told Australia to ‘go to hell’ in the most bitter breach between the two countries in memjory,” said the report. i “Mr Muldoon told reporters in London: ‘There is a feeling of revulsion in New | Zealand against those who iare getting at us. A lot of I New Zealanders are saying, ‘to hell with them’.’ I “He said New Zealanders i would be ‘ashamed’ if Maoris were treated in the same way as Australian I Aborigines. j “Mr Muldoon is angry at Australia and the Prime Minister, (Mr Fraser), over 'the countries’ differing policies towards apartheid and regionalism. “Mr Fraser is, according to sources, ‘surprised and furious’ at the New Zealand attitude. “The strained relations between the two Prime Ministers worsened as the Commonwealth conference officially got under way in London,” said the “Sun” article. “It was also learnt that

Mr Muldoon had attempted to lobby other Pacific leaders to back his policy on regionalism.”

“He was believed to have igued that widening the region to include South-East Asian countries would lessen the influence of Pacific countries.

“But conference sources said that the leaders, including Fiji’s Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, had indicated support for Australia,” said the “Sun.”

“Speaking to journalists at a reception, Mr Muldoon said New Zealand would never stop sportsmen entering the country. “The only people we will stop are criminals,” he said.

Mr Muldoon had said he had no intention of changing his Government policies. His aim at the Commonwealth summit would be to try to explain New Zealand’s position.

The report is attributed to a “Sun” reporter and Australian Associated Press in London.

In London, Mr Muldoon and Mr Fraser were yesterday privately trying to play down the reported rift between them over the issues of apartheid in sport, expansion of regionalism within the Commonwealth, and the means of bridging the gap between rich and poor nations.

The two Prime Ministers disagreed over the matters at a dinner where they were the guests of the Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea (Mr Somare). Sources at the dinner said that conversation between the two had been “vigorous.” But Mr Muldoon was saying privately yesterday that he was not conscious of any strain at a personal level, while Mr Fraser was saying privately that despite “philosophical differences” between them, relations at the personal level were still cordial. Mr Muldoon was the star attraction when Heads of Government at the Commonwealth summit met journalists yesterday. A lunchtime reception —

after the opening session of the summit — was on the spacious lawns outside Marlborough House, the former home of Queen Mary but now the Commonwealth Secretariat’s headquarters.

Mr Muldoon was one of the first out on to the lawn after the 100 m walk down from the Lancaster House conference venue and was immediately button-holed by a group of New Zealand journalists. The inevitable questions and comments about New Zealand’s sports policy attracted a bigger crowd — and what started out as a friendly chat ended up as a full-blown press conference, with journalists from most Commonwealth countries trying to get a word in. Mr Muldoon gave them one bright line when he said that if he was a journalist he would be writing the same types of stories as they — “But that doesn’t mean I don’t have the right to complain.”

When other Commonwealth leaders began their return to Lancaster House, Mr Muldoon was still surrounded on the lawn. He was eventually rescued by the Commonwealth SecretaryGeneral (Mr Shridath Ramphal).

Mr Muldoon left the after noon session — which discussed “changing power relations” — early so that he could appear “live” on 8.8. C. television and explain his stand on sports contacts with South Africa. “Time will tell whether this meeting here will be a waste of time,” he said.

At a press conference late yesterday afternoon, Mr Fraser said that people might wonder why he had made the sort of statements he had about apartheid and sport when Australia was so far away from Africa. “It has nothing to do with whatever policy our near neighbours have at all,” he said. “It is because the moderate leaders in Africa need to know that there are people outside Africa who support their aspirations for equality

in terms of political and human rights. “As you know, there are several different sorts of power in the world and one of the sorts of power is the moral force of a good idea. “It can be : catching, it can work, and the more people who support the object of equality and who oppose apartheid, the greater chance the idea of equality will have of succeeding in a peaceful and proper way,’’ he said. Mr Fraser said that that was why Australia not only had a right to state her views on these issues, but an obligation to do so. “I would obviously hope that expressions coming from the Commonwealth conference can help to move the African situation closer to a reasonable and sensible conclusion,” he said. But Mr Muldoon, in his public statements yesterday, made it clear that his Government had no intention of backing down on the issue. He said that his purpose at the London summit was not to change New Zealand’s position but to enable other Commonwealth leaders to get the "feel” of New Zealand’s position.

He said there were two essential features of his Government’s policy. The first was that it should not interfere in sport, and the second was that it told sports organisations to consider the international .epercussions of inviting South African sports teams to New Zealand.

Australian Government sources said yesterday that Mr Fraser rejected Mr Muldoon’s comments.

People knew that any Australian Government objective was to establish full equality among all Australians. People also knew that in Africa there was still a deliberate policy in introducing race in sport and saying certain people could not play because of the colour of their skin.

They said Mr Fraser believed there was no policy more offensive anywhere in the world that divided people on the basis of race and claimed that one group was superior to another.

There was no analogy between Australia’s position and the question of racism and apartheid in sport. The two things were different, they said.

Of his disagreement with Mr Muldoon about ways to bridge the gap between the world’s rich and poor nations, Mr Fraser said the subject was discussed only briefly at the dinner.

Mr Muldoon’s attitude was that because New Zealand was an agricultural country dependent on the exports of primary products, it had a different view from that of Australia.

“I think we get on quite well,” Mr Muldoon said. “I know he is keen for these regional meetings . . . but I wouldn’t have thought the regional issue was particulary important.” He said he did not think Mr Fraser would have been surprised and angry after the dinner, as reported. Another basic difference between the two Prime Ministers is that Mr Fraser refuses to issue visas to South African sports teams and that he has taken a much sterner line on the sports issue than Mr Muldoon. In “The Times” yesterday, a Canberra University research fellow has questioned Mr Fraser’s recent attacks on apartheid in South Africa.

Mr Stewart Harris, of the Australian National University said in a letter to the editor that Aborigines were treated with discrimination under an act of the Queensland Parliament.

“In Queensland, Aborigines on reserves are subjected to state Government regulations, which not only set them apart from white Australians but also from their fellow Aborigines off reserves,” he said. “This ‘aparthied’ is permitted because the Australian Government has found it politically convenient not to implement in Queensland (alone of all states) the constitutional responsibility it was given for all Aborigines throughout Australia by the 1967 referendum.