Rugby Union criticised

Press, 4 December 1981, Page 4

Rugby Union criticised

PA Wellington The New Zealand Rugby Union’s decision to invite the South African rugby team to New Zealand has been criticised by New Zealand’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Mr H. H. Francis. Addressing the United Nations General Assembly in New York, Mr Francis said that the Rugby Union had failed to recognise its obligations to New Zealand and to the international community. The Rugby Union was alone among sports bodies in New Zealand in failing to live up to its responsibilities under the Gleneagles Agreement — “a responsibility that was as clear as was the right of sports bodies in a country committed to democracy to make their own

decisions on sports matters,” Mr Francis said. The Government, Parliament, and a majority of the New Zealand people had tried to persuade the Rugby Union to reverse its decision, Mr Francis told the General Assembly. : “It was in the face of all these appeals and these actions that the Rugby tlnion went ahead with its plans to invite the South African Springbok team to come to New Zealand,” he said. Mr Francis said that the Government “deeply regretted” the Rugby Union’s failure to “live up to its responsibilities.” The chairman of the Rugby Union, Mr C. A. Blazey, said yesterday that there was nothing new in the speech by Mr Francis.

The union had declined to accept responsibilities which it was convinced lay outside its area. International trade and politics were not a Rugby Union matter. “We do not agree that sport ■ should be used as a vehicle for. solving political systems,” he said. .“I do not accept that we have not carried out our responsibilities, which are to administer football.”. On the feasibility of a “mini-Gleneagles,” proposed as one solution to the divisions created by the Springbok tour, Mr Blazey said the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) had said that he had grave doubts about whether this would work. Earlier report, page 7