The choices for Labour

Press, 18 December 1982, Page 16

The choices for Labour

The crisis in the Labour Party leadership came about mainly from performance in Parliament. The party outside Parliament maintained a strong degree of support for Mr Rowling but was coming to accept that the Parliamentary party needed a fresh sense of purpose and accomplishment in the House. One conclusion to be drawn from this experience is likely to be that the successor to Mr Rowling should be a strong debater. The same conclusion might be drawn from the experience of the National Party: it was Mr Kirk’s command in the House that led to the replacement of Mr Marshall by Mr Muldoon. The ability of Mr D. M. Lange, member of Parliament for Mangere and deputy leader of the Labour Party, as a debater shone through for much of the time that he was acting leader while Mr Rowling was overseas. He showed obvious relish in the position and at least some of the Labour Party appeared invigorated by the experience. Mr Lange has a turn of phrase that can enliven debates and shows an ability to direct his attention to issues of the moment. It should not be forgotten, however, that the Labour Party has some other able debaters: three of the Christchurch members, Mr G. W. R. Palmer, Mrs Ann Hercus, and Mr D. F. Caygill are all formidable. Although the issue of who will lead the party cannot be decided on debating ability alone, a commanding style in the House is invaluable to an Opposition leader; it is an essential quality in a Government leader — which is what the Labour Party is looking for.

The leadership is going to have to be decided on some traditional leadership and deputy leadership grounds and some grounds which are particular to the Labour Party. There will have to be- some balancing of those with a university or other intellectual background against those with a trade union or similar background. Personal factors may also enter into the question. Mrs Kerens has long made it clear that she would not work with Mr Lange as long as Mr Howling wanted the leadership. She has taken little trouble to hide her feelings on support for Mr Lange. Mr Palmer has been a loyal supporter of Mr Rowling though he has shown ah ability to get along with the Lange supporters.. Although Mr Lange is in the strongest position to get the leadership, he will be far from an automatic choice. The reasons for this lie both in himself and in the strength of some others who may. prove to

be contenders. Mr Lange’s ability to shine in the House is unquestioned; his ability to sustain an effort has been questioned. He has, almost impishly, played down his interest in economic affairs — and Governments tend to get elected or dismissed on economic issues. Mr Palmer and Mr Caygill and Mrs Hercus, if they are available for leadership or deputy leadership positions, have not had experience in Government. Mr Lange has not held a portfolio. All four who, whatever their position in the leadership stakes, must be clear choices for portfolios in any future Labour Government, will be vulnerable to attacks from the National Party about their experience in Government. Outside of these four names are those of Mr R. J. Tizard and Mr C. R. Marshall. Both can be dismissed. Mr Tizard is merely hopeful in putting himself forward. Mr Marshall has abilities in his field as spokesman on education matters but the wider appeal which is necessary for the leadership of the party has not yet displayed itself. Another and new name is that of Mr C. J. MOyle. He has had portfolio experience and was accepted, even by National supporters, as a very able Minister of Agriculture. His resignation from Parliament under a cloud will not help him win the support that is needed. Among the final considerations are whether the party leader is going to attract votes. Whatever the personal qualities of Mr Rowling, whatever his support has been in the party at large, the Labour Party has lost three elections while

he has been leader. His television image has been considered a factor in this. While this television image may be a sad commentary on present-day politics, it may prove to be the deciding factor in the choice of leader. The weeks, some of which will be holiday, before the Labour Party leadership election in February, will help to clarify the minds of those who choose, and the party at large. The possibility exists that the resolution of the leadership question will enable the Labour Party to consider the issues themselves more than the personalities. To a great degree the problems of the Labour Party leadership, self-inflicted as they have been, ended yesterday. By taking himself out of the race, Mr Rowling simplified the considerations of loyalty, continuity, and experience. The choice may still be difficult, but it need not be messy; and it will be a straight-forward hunt for a winner.