Clash likely in Govt caucus over calls to delay S.I.S. bill

Press, 5 October 1977, Page 1

Clash likely in Govt caucus over calls to delay S.I.S. bill

From

CEDRIC MENTIPLAY

The feeling is growing in Government circles that the Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill should be withdrawn from the Order Paper to enable a thorough examination of the manner in which the legislation has been drafted.

The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) has not disclosed anv such intention.

Of the two highly controversial issues on the Order Paper, the Contraception, Sterilisation, and Abortion Bill, in nineteenth position, is set down to begin its second-reading debate next Tuesday.

The Security Intelligence measure occupies twentyfourth place, but the rearrangement of the Order Paper is completely in Mr Muldoon’s hands.

Outside pressures, together with some deep concern within the National Party, suggest that there will be a confrontation at the weekly Government caucus meeting tomorrow. The concern comes from growing reaction against the bill from what must be regarded as “informed sources.”

These include at least one member of the Judiciary, and several members of the legal profession, who are convinced that certain clauses of the bill are faulty and may be interpreted more than one way.

One seasoned Parliamentarian has suggested that the bill could be simnlv “taken out of the firing line” by referring it either to a Cabinet committee or to one of the select com-

mittees (such as the Statutes Revision Committee), on which Labour has a representation. Once such a decision were made, the bill in question could disappear for an indeterminate period. A case in point was the Bill of Rights, brought in by the late Mr J. R. Hanan just over a decade ago. It was shown as with the Statutes Revision Committee for several years, but never returned to Parliament.

Circumstances may dictate a totally different course for the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill. When the Anglican and Roman Catholic Bishons of Christchurch (the Right Rev. W. A. Pyatt and the Most Rev. B. P. Ashby) called for the deferment of the bill yesterday, Mr Muldoon’s reaction was strong. “The Bishops have failed to look closely at the bill, and particularly’ at the definition of the word ’subversion’,” he said. “The word may be used either in its technical legal sense, as in the bill, or in its popular sense, as referred to by the Bishops. That is where my friend Minogue also went astray. He did not follow the definition through.” Mr Muldoon said the bill

also laid down that an interception warrant would be released only for a matter of great importance which could not be handled in any other way. He again said that the Government would not send the bill to a select committee. He enumerated the “special safeguards” in the bill and suggested that if the Bishops would write to him he would reply “allaying their fears.” New Zealand was seeing an exchange of views, and the Government would accept anv representations, said Mr Muldoon.

In the meantime, members of the Security Intelligence Service. whose organisation has served under seven Prime Ministers (three Labour, four National) have found themselves in the middle of another storm. Since the “exposure” bv TVI of their Taranaki Street headquarters (no remarkable feat, as it happens) there has been a certain amount of picketins.

Something worse happened, after the publication of names and addresses of alleged S.I.S. officers bv a university magazine during the Sutch case. Some victimisation took place, and there was at least one case of a child narrowly averting injury.

This disclosure of names has occurred again, the culprit this time being the Victoria University magazine, “Salient.” There is unlikely to be a protest by the S.I.S. officers, but they would not be human if they failed to feel some apprehension at the possible effect of this sort of information, true or false, on some of the less responsible elements of the community.

The reaction of Mr Muldoon to this and other sorts of provocation is a kev factor in what happens. In Mr Muldoon’s belief the bill must go through — if only because some of the strongest recommendations in it are entirely the recommendations of the former Chief Ombudsman (Sir Guy Powles), an independent investigator appointed by a Labour Prime Minister.

There is no doubt that the S.I.S. is working now, as it has been doing for more than a quartercentury. The surveillance of foreign agents and the search for “subversion" in its legal sense continue to be prosecuted — but this sort of work can hardlv prosper in the glare of the sort of publicity the service is receiving.

Bishops’ views. P.2