Party president, flood of mail back Mr Quigley

Press, 17 June 1982, Page 1

Party president, flood of mail back Mr Quigley

By

PHILLIP MELCHIOR,

NZPA chief political reporter

Hundreds of letters of support for the former Cabinet Minister, Mr Derek Quigley, poured into Parliament Buildings yesterday as the row within the National Party over his dismissal continued.

Mr Quigley, the member for Rangiora, received strong personal support from the party’s president. Sir George Chapman, who confirmed at a press conference that a split in the party’s Dominion executive preceded the ultimatum for Mr'Quigley to Apologise or resign over his speech' to the Young Nationals.

Sir George also said that it was the Prime Minister’s decision alone to decide who should be in or out of- his Cabinet - a message which Mr Muldoon called “wise” and told pqrty officials to “heed."

Sir George told journalists that he had refused requests to call a special meeting of the party executive. • However, he forecast that the affair would spill over into the party conference, six weeks away. As Mr Quigley displayed piles of letters and telegrams — almost all supporting him — Mr Muldoon’s office said that the Prime Minister had instructed that no information about how much mail he was receiving, or its tenor, should be released., It became clear that in spite of his contention that

Mr Quigley’s speech had “offended, embarrassed, and angered” the Cabinet, Mr Muldoon had invoked Prime Ministerial prerogative in the Cabinet on Monday morning and refused to allow any other Ministers to speak on the issue.

In his first public comment on the Quigley affair, Sir George admitted to reporters that the Dominion executive last week had overturned an invitation for the Minister of Foreign Affairs: (Mr Cooper) to speak at the party conference. Instead of Mr Cooper — a strong supporter of Mr Muldoon — the executive had put Mr Quigley on the list of Ministers to address the four-day, conference. The Minister of Energy (Mr Birch) was the only member of Parliament at the executive meeting when the decision was made on a majority vote, although Mr Muldoon had been at the meeting earlier in the day. The list — naming Mr Muldoon, his deputy (Mr Maclntyre), Mr Birch, Mr Cooper, and the Minister of Trade and Industry (Mr Templeton) — had been prepared, by the party’s general director, Mr Barry Leay, and approved by Sir George. It had also been seen by Mr Muldoon, although not directly prepared by him. Sir George would not reveal how the executive voted or say why Mr Quigley had not been chosen originally. But with Mr Cooper’s •invitation revoked and Mr Quigley no longer' in - the ..Cabinet, the list, has now been cut to four. 'The mood of the executive, revealed by the revolt on the speaking list, was seen as another ‘reason - for Sir George’s refusal to call an emergency meeting of the executive to discuss the. issue before he arid Mr Leay fly to

Japan on Friday. Any unified statement from the party executive condemning Mr Muldoon would be highly embarrassing, sources pointed out.

Sir George walked a tightrope yesterday between Mr Muldoon and Mr Quigley. Mr Quigley said he regretted that the issue was now being seen. as a personality dispute. ’ Sir George emphasised that in the National Party the selection of the Cabinet was entirely the prerogative of the Prime Minister, as was the question of whether Mr Quigley had breached in his speech the convention of collective responsibility. The only interpretation of collective responsibility that mattered was the Prime Minister’s and the views of anyone else, including himself as party president, were “irrelevant,” Sir George said.

However, in What he said was a personal message to Mr Quigley from himself and those in the party who had written, telephoned, and telegrammed support, Sir George said: “Derek, hang in there. The National Party needs you. Stay with us.” The message, he insisted, was not motivated from any desire to avoid the by-elec-tion which would be caused by Mr Quigley resigning from Parliament, but. to let him know that- “we need the vigour he displays, the intellect that he has. the integrity that he represents,, the point of view that he represents, strongly expressed within the party.” . It was right that National included people of strong conflicts.- of opinion and widely differing views. The right of individuals to speak out must be paramount in a democratic society, he said. Sir George admitted that the issue' was- unlikely to have gone away by the time

the party met for its annual conference in Hamilton at the end of next month. It was “inevitable” that it would spill over to the conference and “add a bit of spice.” However, the main issue at the conference would still be the question of who succeeded him as party president, he said.

Mr* Quigley himself spent the day unpacking-in his new quarters outside the Parliamentary executive wing — the Beehive — reading mail, and dealing with an almost constant stream of reporters. Details were gradually emerging yesterday about the apparently tense scene inside the Cabinet room on Monday when Mr Quigley refused to apologise for his speech and was effectively sacked. He described the use of the Prime Ministerial prerogative to prevent any discussion as “entirely constitutional,” while refusing to give details about anything which had happened in the Cabinet.

. Asked how Mr Muldoon could. justify the “offended, embarrassed, and angered” label he pinned on the Cabinet if there, had been no discussion, Mr Quigley said: “I presume one or two of his Cabinet colleagues - must have discussed the matter with him.”

Late last week the Minister of Police (Mr Couch) appeared not to be angered or offended when he told a National . Party branch meeting near Whakatane.that Mr Quigley was. “very, very shrewd ... one of the best (on economic matters) in our Cabinet.”

Mr Quigley’s speech, Mr Couch said, was a bid to stimulate interest in where New Zealand’s money should be spent. Further reports, pages 3, 6.