National Party leadership

Press, 22 October 1980, Page 22

National Party leadership

Sir, — I thought I was out of politics, but feel I, should express my opinion' at a crucial time. I am concerned for the welfare of our country. In my opinion, Rob Muldoon has a lot .going for him and this country. I know his faults and weaki-< ses as well or better than most p ople. In spite of his abrasiveness, most people admire his many attributes and applaud his undoubted ability, particularly his fr: kness and willingness to stand up and be counted. ,His judgment is seldom wrong. His integrity is well known, and admitted by most people. His loyalty to the National Party and the c< antry is unquestionable, In times of serious economy stress, we heed a man at he top who has a great deal of know-how, and is prepared to speak and act in the country’s interest. When change must come, let us hope it will not be now. — Yours, etc., JOHN MCALPINE. October 21, 1980.

Sir, — If the National Party cannot restructure itself w’ it chance has it got of restructuring the economy?—Yours, etc., P. J. WOOD. October 21, 1980.

Sir, — Your leading article probably touched on the real reason for the impetuous caucus action on Mr Muldoon’® leadership, when it said, that a change v/ould allow other Ministers to shine more brightly. The Prime Minister so completely outshines his adversaries th the pressure to try to de-rate him never relaxes. Those Ministers tipped as possible alternar. tivss would only be a shadow of the present Prime Minister ? and .would barely raise a ripple of support for National on the hustings. The po: "ol''s held by Messrs Taiboys, Quigley, Gair, McLay; and Bolger are all losing support for the Government. National can never expect to win all elections and attempts to make the leader the scapegoat are-ir-responsible. National with-

out Mr Muldoon would. be weakened just as Britain's Labour Party is, without Mr Callaghan and New 'Zealand’s Labour is, without Mr Tizard as Deputy Leader. — Yours, etc., • ‘ J. F. GARVEY.

Westport, October 19, 1980.

Sir, — I. was disgusted this evening on television to see Mr Muldoon up to his old tricks again by refusing to hive Mr Scott of the “Listener” at his press conference. I was amazed to see that there did not appear to be a re 'Ction Corn the “journalists” present. What has happened to the backbone that journalists used to have in protecting their own? — Yours, etc., BERNARD JONES. Octc er 20, 1980.

Sir, — If the National members of Parliament who are attempting to replace Mr Muldoon with Mr Taiboys as their leader succeed it will be a calamity for the coun. try and a catastrophe for the party. Consider Mr Talboys’ recent record: As Minister of Education he was so unpopular that few teachers will support the party of which he is a member. In Foreign Affairs his record is almost as dismal. He seems to leave the important decisions to the departmental bureaucrats. The very mediocre results of his overseas trips compare badly with the brilliant successes of those by .Mr Muldoon. And failure seems to call to failure as most of the Ministers supporting Mr Talboys performed poorly in their own portfolios. — Yours, etc., J. M. TAYLOR. Te Aroha. . . October 20 1980.

Sir, — An astute industrialist once said that it was unwise to promote an accountant to the position of manager because of obsession with figures and being out of touch with reality. After watching the performance of the present Prime Minister with eager anticipation in 1975 and to my utter bewilderment as we approach the end of 1980, I can only concur with the industrialist that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. To simplify rather than complicate goes against the grain of modern economics and the word efficiency is surpassed by bureaucratic muddlement. To add to the confusion the mess of 1980 is forgotten pending the exciting energy future. The electors are to have the carrot of the future as a preelection diet in 1981. If we are not capable of living in the present then how good is the future? — Yours, etc., L. J. STEVENS. October 18, 1980.

Sir, — As Mrs Muldoon has now come to the defence of Mr Muldoon by advising him to give away the job of Prime Minister if the people do not appreciate what he has done for the country, it seems pertinent, to ask if caucus is called upon to check the actions, of Mr Birch and Mr Wellington (Ministers of Energy and Education) who are implementing legislation which is bound to implicate other members of Parliament, espe-

cially the Prime Minister who could perhaps take the people into the pros and cons of matters which are largely kept secret until projects are already in an advanced stage of planning. This reflects on the Prime Minister who would serve the country better by remaining in New Zealand enough to quash the jibes being bandied about regarding our tourist Prime Minister. With Mr Taiboys also taking regular jaunts overseas we are left in lost limbo. — Yours, etc.,

L. E. REID. October 21, 1980.

Sir, — In every “ultra”political system the press is curtailed by the ruling government or dictator. The basis of a democracy is press freedom. So in this case it is not a matter of, “Yes, Mr Scott,” or “No, Mr Scott;” it is a matter of, “Yes, democracy,” or “No, democracy.” It is not the National Party speaking. It is just a fellow who forgets that even Prime Ministers have to stick to the rules of the game. — Yours, etc., F. N. H. ADMIRAAL. October 21, 1980.