Mr Rowling gives notice

Press, 27 April 1983, Page 14

Mr Rowling gives notice

Mr Rowling’s decision not to stand for reelection in the General Election due at the end of next year is not a surprise. Many people may have hoped, after he announced his intention to stand down from the leadership of the Labour Party, that he would stay in politics. Mr Rowling has held the most senior positions of the party — vice-president, president, and deputy leader, and leader of the Parliamentary party — for the greater part of his Parliamentary life. He is ho longer part of the group that makes up the leadership of the Labour Party. He judged, and it was probably a sound judgment, that the time had come for him to go. The manner in which he gave up the leadership does not really allow him to be cast in the role of an elder statesman of the party. He has avoided being put into this role by default. Mr Rowling suffered because he took over the party after the death of Mr Norman Kirk in 1974 and, being thrust into the duties of Prime Minister, was not able to put his own stamp on the Administration sufficiently before the 1975 General Election turned out the Labour Party • only 15 months later. Mr Lange has a longer period in Opposition to put his own imprint on the party, and he does not inherit the style or policies of a predecessor in office. Mr Rowling has personal qualities which endeared him to many people. Even many of those who have opposed him politically consider him to be straightforward, honourable, consistent in his views, and uncomplicated in expressing them. As a politician he has strengths and failings. Historians will almost certainly reject some of the failings with which he had been labelled. He''was unlucky in the particular time in which he was Prime Minister and party leader. Mr Rowling, as party vice-president and then president, was influential in the Labour Party victory of 1972. After the devastating defeat of 1975, he was largely responsible for rebuilding party morale and membership, although, under his leadership, the party lost elections in 1978 and 1981. Labour Party finances owe much to his work and planning. As leader of the Labour Party, he dealt expeditiously with what became known as the Moyle and O’Brien affairs. The defeat of the Labour Party in 1975 shocked him profoundly, but he fought back. He persisted in politics after the death of his daughter in 1978 — a time when he came near to giving up. Instead of accepting the label of “weak” that he has sometimes been given, historians in years to come may judge him to have been a firm and strong leader, in spite of his electoral failures. His failings as a politician lay in his

inability to exploit a situation to his party’s political advantage: His sense of timing was faulty. As the advocate of the sound idea of cutting some of the direct links between industrial unions and control of the Labour Party, he picked a time that left him exposed to criticism. This test set in train the events that led to his resignation as leader. Although he could arouse an audience that was already sympathetic to him, he lacked a turn of phrase that seemed apposite for the moment. Neither his voice nor his delivery were suited to television. Had he been a politician in the days before television, the electorate might have treated him more kindly. Mr Rowling was best at meetings in which he could communicate directly and more personally with people. For the Labour Party, this style of leadership was helpful in building up the party organisation. Among the public at large, television helped to defeat the politician. Mr Rowling assumed leadership of the Labour Party when the world economy was slowing down. It was a bad time for anyone to attempt to steer a country through. He also faced, in Mr Muldoon as leader of the National Party, a formidable debater, a good" television performer, and an astute politician who had a Parliamentary team who seemed cohesive in their views. Mr Muldoon’s unrestrained vigour appealed to many New Zealanders and Mr Rowling appeared unable to combat his style. Mr Muldoon’s leadership was created largely by Mr Rowling’s own predecessor, Mr Kirk. The National Party made its choice as a reaction to Mr Kirk and this was another problem for Mr Kirk’s successor. Many of Mr Rowling’s difficulties were of the Labour Party’s own making. He got less work from some of the members than he deserved; and he got less loyalty than he deserved, although some of those who were loyal to him were intensely loyal. It was reasonable for the leadership question to be put to the vote in the party caucus from time to time, but it was also reasonable for the leadership issue to be resolved, at least for a decent period. For so long as there was dissension within the Labour Party about the leadership, there was little prospect that the issue would be settled in the minds of the public. Mr Lange is seeking to impose a new style of leadership on the party that he has inherited from Mr Rowling. One of the legacies within the party may be a reluctance to give full loyalty to the leader. As Mr Rowling has said, this point is likely to be influential in the outcome of the next election. Although Mr Rowling has other reasons for retiring, his decision removes all possibility that he will be suspected of looking critically at the new leader.