Mr Minogue warns of ‘slide from democracy’

Press, 15 July 1982, Page 3

Mr Minogue warns of ‘slide from democracy’

PA Wellington Unless people respond to the threat to the law posed by the Clyde high dam compromise, a slide away from

Mr Minogue told journalists yesterday that politicians responded to clear expressions of public concern. “When that is missing they do not listen, they do not seem to respond at all,” he said. - ; ft ,Parliament,-..which would' overcome the "legal process to allow the Clyde dam to proceed if proposed empowering legislation was passed, would only change when people demanded change, said Mr Minogue.

He said that he had not seriously considered whether he would stay in Parliament in light of the Clyde controversy, which has seen him go against his Government colleagues by refusing to support the legislation. Asked today if he was considering his future as a member, he said. “I have not got to that.”

Earlier, he had been reported as saying that if New Zealanders did not express

anger about the compromise reached by the Government and Social Credit, he thought there was nothing more he could do in the political system.

Any conjecture that this could be his last term in Parliament was “pretty baseless-«t this stage. Some, I have no doubt, would like to think it was — they may be disappointed," he said.

Asked if he would like to see a General Election so that people could express their opinions on the issue, Mr Minogue said: “No, I do not think so.” He asked what the central issue of an election would be, because there was widespread confusion as to what the real Clyde issue was.

"Some see the issue as one of employment of workers at Clyde. Others see the whole question as centering on the need to provide an economic fillip to the Otago region," he said.

Others regarded the preservation of Lake Wanaka as more important, while flood control was another consideration.

"So many people see this question from a particularly narrow perspective,” Mr Minogue said. “Some may say

my perspective is narrow. In fact, it relates to what I came here for — to be concerned about Government administration of the whole bureaucratic process." Earlier, Mr Minogue had said in a radio interview that the compromise meant that the Planning Tribunal and possibly the High Court was being told to sit with a pistol pointed at its head — "saying in effect, if you do not find in this direction we will simply legislate to get the answer that we want." ‘‘What does this reduce the courts to? What sort of charade does a court hearing become? What sort of an idiot bothers going before a court whose decision is predetermined in that way? Why waste your time and your money and your effort?” he said. Mr Minogue said that he ■had no doubt many New Zealanders would shrug their shoulders and say, “Oh well, politicians playing games.” “I would like to say this to every New Zealander — if you do not soon wake up to what is happening in your country, then God help both you and your country," he said. Reiterating that he would

not support the empowering legislation, Mr Minogue said the compromise agreement indicated that. New Zealand democracy was near the end of the road.

“I see this as indicating that virtually anything is possible in New Zealand politics, and I am warning all New Zealanders that anything has become possible," he said. The former chief ombudsman, Sir Guy Powles, ,said yesterday that he basically agreed with Mr Minogue that the Government's intention to proceed with the' Clyde dam in spite of court rulings was possibly the end of democracy in New Zealand. “But I would not have put it in those terms. It is stating it a bit high. There is a lot more to democracy than that, but basically I agree with his attitude,” Sir Guy said.

“I think they should let the matter proceed through the courts without the threat of Parliament hanging over the top.”

And if the courts went against the dam? < “Of course, it is a gamble you have to take., I think it is highly unlikely," Sir Guy said.