Moyle ‘apology’ rejected: report may be public yet

Press, 11 April 1978, Page 1

Moyle ‘apology’ rejected: report may be public yet

The former Labour Minister of Agriculture, Mr C. J. Moyle, has told the retired Supreme Court judge, Sir Alfred North, that he did not intend to reflect on his ‘"’adequacy or impartiality in recent comments he made about Sir Alfred's inquiry into the ‘"’Moyle affair”.

A copv of a letter, dated March 30. from Mr Moyle to Sir Alfred was released by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Rowling) yesterday after the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) had said that he would recommend to the Cabinet that the full report of the inquiry be published unless Mr Moyle withdrew his comments and apologised to Sir Alfred.

Mr Moyle told Sir Alfred: “Let me express my regret for any embarrassment mv comments may have caused vou and permit me to reaffirm that any reflection on your adequacy or impartiality was never intended.” reports the Press Association from Wellington. Sir Alfred said that he did not regard this as an adeouate apology.

Mr Moyle, now the labour candidate for Whangarei. had said that Sir Alfred was ill when he conducted the inquirv. He was also critical of Sir Alfred for not allowing him to be represented by counsel.

Only a condensed version nf Sir Alfred’s report was published at the time, although a copv of the full report was given to Mr Rowling. Sir Alfred recentlv asked that the full report be published.

Mr Muldoon, who raised the matter at a news conference yesterday, said that he was reluctant to see the report published but Sir Alfred was correct in wanting to be cleared of Mr Moyle’s allegations. The police had no objection to the full report’s being published. Asked if the report was damaging, Mr Muldoon replied. "Oh yes. unquestionably.” Asked if his reluctance to have the report published was because it could be dangerous and embarrassing for the National Party, he said, “No. It is almost exactly the opposite. and Mr Rowling takes exactly the same view as I do.”

Asked if the report contained the names of National Party members and the “dirty tricks brigade,” he said, “I wouldn’t be surprised but I would have no worry about them.”

He called on Mr Rowling to disassociate himself from Mr Moyle’s original comments and reaffirm his own confidence in Sir Alfred, who was appointed at Mr Rowling’s suggestion. If Mr Rowling did this and Mr Moyle apologised "that, I think, would finish the matter,” Mr Muldoon said. If they did not, he did not intend to let the matter rest.

Sir Alfred said that he had sent Mr Moyle’s letter to the Solicitor-General (Mr R. C. Savage. Q.C.). In the letter, Mr Moyle said: "It does seem that a recent letter of mine to the editor of the ‘Northern Advocate’ (the Whangarei daily newspaper) in reply to what I consider to be a vicious editorial, conveys impressions of you that were not intended.

“I want to assure you my reference to your health was not meant to convey any inadequacy or inability on your part to conduct the inquiry.

“My comment about bias referred only to the terms of reference and in no way suggested that you were anything but impartial. “My reference to your attitude to the terms of reference stems from your sympathetic comment to me about ‘having to answer the questions asked’ and an impression conveyed to me by my counsel on this matter.

“Let me express my regret for any embarrassment my comments may have caused you and permit me to reaffirm that any reflection on your adequacy or impartiality was never intended.”

Mr Rowling said that Mr Movie had never intended to cast any doubt on Sir Alfred’s competence or impartiality. “He has since written to Sir Alfred making this quite clear and that, in my view, is where the matter should be allowed to stand. “If the Prime Minister wants to do anything else, it is up to him.” At another news conference last evening, Mr Muldon said he had not been aware that Mr Moyle had written to Sir Alfred when he had called for an apology from him earlier in the day. He was shown a copy of Mr Moyle’s letter and asked if he thought that it constituted an apology.

“I would wait for Sir Alfred’s reaction,” Mr Muldoon replied. Told that Sir Alfred did not consider it an adequate apology, he said “I would be very guided by his reaction. He is a very experienced judge.”