HART accused of misrepresentation

Press, 1 April 1981, Page 6

HART accused of misrepresentation

The president of the Canterbury Rugby Union, Mr B. J. Drake, will have no more dealings with HART. This was one point made bv Mr Drake during a discussion at last evening’s] union management com-! mittee meeting on news-I paper reports of a private I meeting it held last week with three HART members. Mr Drake said he could hardly believe one ■ newspaper’s account o ( f what took place, which was given ■ to a reporter by members of the HART delegation. “It was certainly quite different * from what actually happened and I was most, concerned at charges that I had prevented union members expressing their opinions. “To say that I stopped members from answering questions is utter nonsense,” said Mr Drake. He felt insulted by a HART suggestion that he; had connived to have a per-, son other than a rugby union member present at the meeting. The police officer who had been in another room had been present at the request of the police and Mr Drake

said he did not believe that the union had acted improperly agreeing • to this request. “We are reaching a parlous situation if we, as an organisation, have to answer to any other organisation, and more especially one such as HART, in taking steps to protect our own premises. “After the way HART represented the meeting we had with them I will have no further dealings with them,” Mr Drake said.

“Not only was their account of the meeting quite wrong, but they then made allegations which were quite unfounded."

He implied that the union may have made a mistake in talking to HART. “Every time you play their game they just grab the opportunity to get themselves more publicity,” he said. There' was a strong show of support for Mr Drake from round the table. Several members denied the allegations that they had been “stifled,” some saying that if they, had not spoken during the meeting then the decision had been theirs; Others felt strongly about

la newspaper report alltginthat there was a split in the union’s ranks on the tour [issue. “This is absolute rubbish,” Mr J. G. Cadigan said. Mr D. Ching said /that after reading one newspaper’s account of the meeting he seriously doubted whether it was the same meeting that he had attended. “The picture presented was totally wrong," he said. Mr M. R. Barnett had the final say. “After reading’the report in one paper I can only say that it reflects the calibre of the people we were talking to."

Earlier there had been a related discussion on whether the average person, rugby-minded or not. was being given a chance to express a view on the tour. It was prompted by Mr V. C. Thomas, who said that one or two people were taking a lot of flak on the tour issue. • ' ■■ .•.,]. ■ ! ■' “I am in favour 'of the tour and I am not afraid to say so. I think there are a ‘ lot of people who feel the same way ’and I -just wish we could hear more from them,” he said.