Post-election Cabinets

Press, 26 June 1978, Page 16

Post-election Cabinets

By

CEDRIC MENTIPLAY

The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) is unlikely to rearrange his Cabinet before the General Election. This means that the three retiring Ministers (Messrs J. B. Gordon, A. McCready and H. R. Lapwood) will be allowed to serve out their time in their present positions.

It would have been a credible political ploy for Mr Muldoon to have conducted a Cabinet realignment early in 1978 in order to display the Government’s administrative strength. The production of new faces at the top level might have reassured some electors.

The fact that Mr Muldoon has not changed his Cabinet in more than a year may be taken as a proof of his assurance that his Government is not under threat. To concede this is to admit that after the General Election is the best time to select the 1978-81 Cabinet. With Messrs Gordon, McCready and Lapwood retiring, the following positions will be up for reallocation: Labour. State Services, Defence. Police, War Pensions, Rehabilitation. Tourism, Publicity, and control of the Go'-<>rnment Printing Office. Whatever happens in the General Election, a new Cabinet will have to be formed. Assuming National carries the day, some present Ministers may still miss reelection: prime candidates for Cabinet rank may not find favour with the electors. For example, a swing in public favour of less than 1 5 per cent would remove the present Minister of

Social Welfare (Mr Walker), and the highly-favoured Cabinet aspirant, Miss Colleen Dewe, while still leaving National in power. Five months from now, Mr Muldoon, battered but victorious, could be selecting virtually a new Cabinet. The Labour portfolio would provide his biggest headache, for to fill it with someone of adequate status (such as the present Minister of Justice, Mr Thomson) would mean that other portfolios would have to be reallocated. Mr Thomson has been an effective Minister of Labour and Immigration (1972), and has filled in ably since. One source suggests that Mr Gair could be moved from Energy to Labour — but it could be that in the present state of the world economy, Energy is even more important than Labour. With Labour disposed of, Mr Muldoon’s problem would be easier. If it were deemed advisable to keep Justice separate from the AttorneyGeneralship, Mr P. I. Wilkinson could get preferment, with either Mr J. K. McLay or Mr D. F. Quigley, both legally qualified, to take over the other legal tasks. Mr McLav has gained much experience as chairman of the Statutes Revision Committee, and would make an efficient Attorney-General. Also worthy of consideration is another youngish lawyer, Mr B. E. Brill, but he must first survive a strong Labour challenge in Kapiti.

Present Ministers who are believed to be upward bound in Cabinet rating are the Associate Minister of Finance (Mr Templeton) and the Minister of Fisheries (Mr Bolger). With Mr Gair, they could be promoted — but under the National system, with all portfolios being assumed as a Prime Ministerial responsibility, promotion is linked to compatibility with Mr Muldoon.

The post of Minister of Defence could well go to Mr E. G. Latter (Marlborough) who, too young for World War 11, rose to the rank of brigadier in the postwar territorial army. His appointment would, perhaps, help to modernise defence thinking. Tourism is being linked more and more these days with policy of the Tourist Hotel Corporation, Air New Zealand, and certain international organisations. It would provide a good area in which to launch a new minister, such as Mr W. F. Birch or even Mr K. M. Comber, who for a long time has been Parliamentary Under-secretary’ in such spheres as Local Government, Internal Affairs, Recreation and Sport. Civil Defence, and Arts. It has been a long grooming-period for this sonin law of Sir Keith Holyoake. If Labour succeeds in November, the Cabinet result will be even harder to predict. Labour does not admit a Prime Minister’s right to nominate his own helpers. In the event of a Labour

victory, the party caucus will meet, and will produce a list of 20 or more names. The Prime Minister will then fit those names to the various Cabinet posts — a task which some Labour Prime Ministers have not found congenial.

There is also the curious complication that to find preferment a Labour member has to be not. only effective and qualified, but also popular with the main body of his colleagues. The more autocratic National way of selection avoids this extra hurdle.

We can expect, if the polls are kind, to see Sir Basil Arthur, Messrs R. L. Bailey, B. G. Barclay, F. M. Coleman, M. A. Connelly, R. 0. Douglas, A. J. Faulkner, W. A. Fraser, W. W. Freer, J. L. Hunt, E. E. Isbey, M. Rata, R. J. Tizard, and Mrs T. W. M. Tirikatene-Sullivan in a Labour Cabinet.

Well up in any ballot should be Mrs M. Batchelor (who could be added to a Labour Cabinet as considerably more than a feminist symbol, as, say, Minister of Welfare). Others should include Messrs N. J. Kirk, R. W. Prebble. C. R. Marshall. D. R. Lange, and M. F. Courtney. Of course, they’ would have to take their chances with the returnees, who would come flooding back in a Labour victory of such magnitude. These would include Messrs F. D. Flynn. J. W. Ridley, J. A. Walding, M. K. Moore and Dr M. E. R. Bassett.

Comment from the Capital I