Labour Party leadership

Press, 7 January 1983, Page 10

Labour Party leadership

Sir—According to P. M. Turner (January 6) I "should

state my political prejudice before making fictitious statements about the Prime Minister and the economy." Why? Stating the obvious would not necessarily invalidate criticism which is based on verifiable fact (and is definitely not fiction). With a few exceptions (e.g. Switzerland, Norway) the entire capitalist world is going through yet another of its cyclical crises and what has made it worse here is the patent incompetence of the National Government and its leader. As the highly regarded “National Business Review" said last month, New Zealand's current debt and economic performance compare badly with many much less-favoured Third World nations and we are increasingly being likened to other “banana republics."— Yours, etc.,

M. T. MOORE. January 6. 1983.

Sir.—May I remind your correspondent M. T. Moore (January 5) that the point at issue is the leadership of the Labour Party. Like arm-chair sports critics, to make assumptions that anyone else might have done things differently, it is not a reasonable argument and leads to pure assumption and speculation. Having inherited then reversed both a surplus of trade and current account. then, within a few short months, to lead a party from the treasury benches in this country's largest-ever political rout cannot have been proud leadership. Since then, to have held the leadership by using one’s own casting vote is likewise not to enjoy leadership from a position of strength. It

will be of interest to many to see who the Labour Party chooses to accomplish the tasks ahead — equipped to handle the media, lead in the House, and attempt to reverse the political polls.—Yours, etc.,

WILLIAM RICHARDSON. January 5, 1983.