Curbing bureaucracy

Press, 28 May 1979, Page 2

Curbing bureaucracy

No such doubt accompanied the remit which' called on members of Parliament to support the party constitution, especially those rules relating to, “the promotion of private enterprise with healthy competition,” and the curbing of bureaucratic control. There was unanimous support for this remit. Delegates related it to a return to fundamental principles. Delegates emphasised that to hold the Government, party members must get back to National fundamentals. Mr J. Tanner (Western Hutt) drew solid support when he said: “Unfortunately we have a Prime Minister and a Parliamentary team who have lost, sight of what the grassroots; bulk of the party is trying to sav.”

A real fear was expressed by Mr R. Doughty (Manawatu), who expressed doubt about the value of conference opinion in influencing

members of Parliarhent. I “Our elected members of ! Parliament tend to expound party principles when in . their electorates, and do something else in the caucus room,” he said. The greatest surge of support came, however, when speakers appealed for a decrease in bureaucratic control. Discussion on this subject i was led, perhaps significantly, by two Dominion councillors (Messrs J. Schellenberg and M. Kynoch). Mr Schellenberg said that there was a nation-wide movement, indicating that people wanted to be left alone. "Get off my back,” is the message of the citizens to the : bureaucrats, he claimed. Mr Kynoch’s message: “Our high principles must be converted into a practical workable policy.” Delegates outside the conference tended to deny that there was real polarisation

between the. views of the Prime Minister and those of the party president (Mr G. A. Chapman). “They represent two views! within the party,” a delegate said. “High principles have to be broken down to levels of interpretation. That is why there is room for both Mr Chapman and Mr Muldoon in the party lead-! ershif.” But differences of viewpoint expressed earlier in the year moved the Wellington president (Mr R. Johnston) to deny in his annual report that there was any movement to the right in the party. “What has happened is that our basic membership, and a large slice of the electorate at large have said, “No,” to more costly and ineffective welfare services and health services, and to indiscriminate growth in the public spector at the expense of the private sector,” he said.