‘Cover-up of deception’

Press, 5 July 1982, Page 6

‘Cover-up of deception’

Labour's spokesman ' on constitutional affairs, Mr G. W. R. Palmer, has said that the Government is “intent on covering up its deception” over the Clyde dam., By the cynical manipulation of events,.giving hollow undertakings and by making secret decisions, the Government had circumvented the legal process, he said. Mr Palmer said he, was' referring to a statement by the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) last Thursday on a report .by—the''Minister of Works (Mr-F.riedlander) outlining CabinetTieeisions on the Clyde dam. “On July 15. 1981, the

Cabinet approved all the works involved in the construction of the high dam project. At that time the High Court appeal was pending,” Mr Palmer said. “It seems quite wrong and unprincipled to make a Cabinet decision to go ahead with construction of the high-dam when the water right was still subject to appeal. The Government has done this on its own admission. It is a total contempt of the law.” “The Government made those decisions in secret and did not announce them because to do so would have created an uproar,” Mr Raimer said. “It is now

covering up its deviousness because it has gone too far with the dam work. Its own decisions hqve forced it to that point. It was “quite revolting” that the Minister of Justice (Mr McLay) should defend the Government’s action when he was a party to the Cabinet decisions. Mr McLay knew that there were actions in the court that would be affected by the decisions, yet he did not disclose them. Mr Palmer said Mr McLay’s assertion that the present situation resembled what had been done with the Matrimonial Property Act was ‘quite wrong." That act.

; did not apply to court actions ■ which had already started, i Mr Palmer also took issue ' with .an assertion by Mr Friedlander that work on a low dam at Clyde could not ! proceed without delay. Mr I Friedlander said in “The i Press” of Saturday that a ! new design for a low dam ' would take two. years to > prepare and that an Orders in-Council for the low dam '■ would be subject to High Court appeals. The possibility of an ap- ■ peal against an Order-in-I Council was remote because ■ the legal grounds on which : an appeal could be based were few.