East Coast seats—clean sweep for National?

Press, 7 November 1978, Page 10

East Coast seats —clean sweep for National?

By CEDRIC MENTIPLAY

On the face of it, National seems fairly strong in the mainly fanning electorates on the East Coast of the North Island. There is even a whisper that National may take Napier from the veteran Labour member, Mr G. Christie, giving National all four seats — Hastings, Napier, Pahiatua, and Hawke’s Bay. Those who make this judgment at this time, however, have not bothered to study ail the cross-currents. First, the farming and farm-support vote is not completely with the Government on a number of issues; second, Social Credit support in the Hastings-Hawke’s Bay area has built up enormously since 1975. It seems unlikely that the National member for .Pahiatua, Mr J. Falloon,

The electorates

can be defeated in an electorate which supported Sir Keith Holyoake for many years, and which survived the 1977 boundary-change with an addition of 10 per cent of Hawke's Bay votes. Indeed, Pahiatua seems as safe as National as any seat can be — unless unhappiness turns to revolt in the farming sector. But Pahiatua would be the only “sure thing” in this group of political starters. Hastings, rated as “marginal National” since a Labour majority of 1148 in 1972, turned to a National surplus of 491 in 1975, and is not a certainty either way since then. Social Credit pressure could change the result in Hastings, Napier, and Hawke’s Bay. Hastings The Hastings boundaries

remained the same in 1977 as in 1975, which should make assessment easier. That it does not do so is mainly a result of the efforts of the Social Credit candidate, Mr J. P. Dwyer. As well as being the deputy leader of his party, he is showing a genius for political salesmanship. Mr Dwyer resigned his job as secondary schoolteacher last year in order to devote his whole time to the drudgery of votebuilding. Since then he has personally signed up about 1000 new Social Credit members, has talked to about 3000 people at what he calls “cottage meetings,” and has established a score of Social Credit information centres. He maintains that with Mr Bruce Beetham’s two Parliamentary bills in the records, the Social Credit monetary system is an open book to anyone with the wit to read it. He has a strong and dedicated band of supporters who have turned the campaign into a crusade in Hastings, and bordering seats. The Labour candidate, Mr D. J. Butcher, a union representative and a graduate in economics, aged 30, is also well supported. He believes that the Social Credit “honeymoon” is over, and that many votes will come back to Labour — certainly an admission that Labour lost them in the first place. The sitting member, Mr W. R. Fenton, is quietly

confident, and happy about the strength of his organisation. Ih Parliament, he has tended to espouse causes which may have lost him support. He admits his hold is marginal. and has fought for regional development help, not always successfully.

There have been gains tor Hastings and surrounding Hawke’s Bay, however, in . education, health, social

welfare and recreation fields. So how does Hastings stand? Mr Dwyer will win votes, possibly doubling the 1788 cast for Social Credit three years ago. Though this will not win him the seat, it could change the positions of the two major parties. Those who should know, however, say that the votes he is winning come from either Labour or Values. Nobody can be sure who will win in Hastings — or who will come second. Hawke’s Bay In Hawke’s Bay, as in Hastings, anything can happen. It is remembered that in 1972 Hastings preferred a Labour unknown to an effective National Minister (Mr D. MacIntyre). In 1978, Hawke's Bay can just as easily turn out the Speaker, Mr J. R. Harrison.

The new Hawke’s Bay electorate incorporates some 88 per cent of the votes cast in the 1975 electorate, plus 11 per cent of votes from the former Napier electorate, which had a Labour bias. In 1972, National hung on to Hawke’s Bay by a mere 26 votes, which recovered to 2569 in 1975. At the same time, the Social Credit vote increased from 662 in 1972 to 1211 in 1975. Because

of the Dwyer influence, this could double at this month’s polls — which does not justify the description “fairly safe National,” unless Labour provides all the Social Credit gains. Napier In Napier, the sitting member, Mr G. Christie, had majorities of 1935 in 1972 and 1155 in 1975. A swing to National of less than 4 per cent would topple him — and that swing could be provided if Social Credit doubles its 1975 score of 951 votes. Mr Christie is a very experienced electorate politician, however, drawing

much of his support from the workers at the port and those of supporting industries. The National Party candidate is Mr K. J. Rose, aged 34, a Waipawa farmer. He is an industrious candidate, and has adopted the slogan, “Make it hap-

pen in Napier’ — but Waipawa is not quite Napier and sometimes the fortress-like aspect of the near-island city suggests “strangers keep out." Social Credit in Napier is profiting from the activity of Mr Dwyer, just over the border. The Napier candidate, Mr L. C. Barker, a salesman, aged 47, is doing the best he can, but his organisation appears to have some flaws. For Values, Mr J. E. Saunders, an electrical engineer, aged 58, seems so far to have made only a slight impact on the electorate. As in other places, there — seems insufficient room for two minor parties in Napier. A reasonable forecast would be that Mr Christie will hold Napier, if his voting strength is not eroded too much by Social Credit. Credibility is an issue — and Mr Christie’s presence is a credible one. So the questions remain on the North Island’s East Coast, as in varying degrees everywhere else: To what degree are the voters "tired and dis-, illusioned by the performance of the Government?” To what degree is Labour seen as a credible alternative? How far has Social Credit displaced Labour in the minds of those who vould not vote National under any circumstances? How many former National supporters will really withhold their votes because they do not like the Prime Minister, or because a facet of policy has displeased them. Only voting day will bring the answers.

Election 78