Moderate counsel prevails

Press, 5 September 1983, Page 8

Moderate counsel prevails

From ROBERT CROSS in Auckland Sir Wallace Rowling used his mana on Saturday at Labour’s annual conference

to steer it to moderation through a minefield of radical remits. He successfully persuaded delegates either to emasculate or to reject the international affairs remits he called “political hot potatoes.” These included calls for the next Labour government to withdraw from A.N.Z.U.S., support the Palestine Liberation Organisation, and support the Vietnamese-backed Kampuchean regime of Heng Samrin. Sir Wallace asked the conference to consider such

remits in the light of political reality and the objective of becoming the government. Resolving to withdraw from A.N.Z.U.S. was an impotent gesture that could play a part in keeping Labour in opposition, he said. Remits promoting armed neutrality as an alternative to A.N.Z.U.S. were unrealistic because they did not take into account that policy’s cost.

“I suggest that any arrangement which attempts to shut out the Americans would be unrealistic,” Sir Wallace said.

He proposed an omnibus remit to replace the remits on A.N.Z.U.S. This called for the renegotiation of New Zealand’s association with Australia and the United States.

A Lyttelton delegate, Mr D. O’Rourke, was one of several who strongly opposed Sir Wallace’s move. “I believe it is very important for us as a conference to reaffirm the stand we have taken at conferences for the last three years,” he said. It was important for the conference to set down long-term ideals, ‘feven if these were not immediately accepted by the policy council.

In spite of such appeals, the omnibus remit was passed. Sir Wallace said that supporting the P.L.O. was inconsistent with Labour’s stance on Israel. This was because the P.L.O. did not recognise Israel, but Labour had always recognised the right of Israel to exist. An Onehunga delegate, Mr D. Wakeham, said it was

essential for Labour to recognise the P.L.O. “Labour’s predisposition to justice and humanity makes it essential for us to

recognise both points of view. The label of terrorist applies to both sides,” he said. A Marlborough delegate, Mr P. Uncemath, said his branch was losing members because of remits that called for the recognition of terrorists. The member of Parliament for Roskill, Mr P. B. Goff, moved an amendment that changed support for the P.L.O. to support measures promoting peace in the Middle East. This was passed. The remit for supporting the Heng Samrin regime

was rejected after Sir Wallace described it as “rather quaint and rather paradoxical" because of Labour’s opposition to other puppet regimes. , A long remit on nucleqr policy was passed with debate. It reaffirmed the party’s commitment to a South Pacific nuclear-free zone, and ruled out visits by nuclear-powered or nucleararmed vessels. This showed that the party was not prepared for

the nuclear policy changes floated earlier this year by the party leader, Mr Lange.

A batch of anti-South African remits was passed. These included clauses for the closing of the South African consulate, the withholding of visas from South African sports groups, and the refusal of the Labour caucus to grant pairs to members of Parliament visiting South Africa. The next Labour government will also be called on to support the “recognised black liberation movements of South Africa.” Sir Wallace said afterwards that the conference’s response to the international affairs remits was a victory for moderation. It showed that Labour had its “feet firmly on the ground” in its international policy. The move away from radical policy contradicted the course advocated the previ-

ous evening by the party’s president, Mr J. P. Anderton.

It was a clear rebuff for the party’s liberal Left wing. Earlier in the day, Labour’s spokesman on justice, Mr F. D. O’Flynn, played a similar role to Mr Rowling in watering down the justice remits.

He diverted a move to have the next Labour government abolish the Security Intelligence Service by successfully moving an amendment to restrict the service to investigating terrorist threats.

Mr O’Flynn struck again on a remit to abolish the Honours List.

This was replaced by a call for the next Labour government to start a “distinctly New Zealand honours system with appropriate grades,” and to abolish all and imperalistic honours.”