THE PRESS FRIDAY, JULY 20, 1984. Time left for accounting

Press, 20 July 1984, Page 12

THE PRESS FRIDAY, JULY 20, 1984. Time left for accounting

Sir Robert Muldoon, a skilled survivor in politics, has faced what probably will be the last challenge to his leadership. On this occasion he was out-gunned; but he will probably remain leader of the National Party in Parliament for about five months and a half. His caucus colleagues decided yesterday that he will remain leader of the National Party for the first sittings of the new Parliament. The leadership of the party will be reviewed at the first caucus meeting next year at which time, according to Sir Robert himself, he is not likely to be a candidate. In simple terms, Sir Robert has been obliged to acknowledge that he is no longer the preferred leader in the eyes of many of his caucus and in his party’s hierarchy. He has been given time to resign from the leadership with dignity. The course has wider political advantages as well. The apparent compromise reached at yesterday’s caucus meeting might yet be disturbed. The National Party conference next week could strain the arrangement, or events during the next few months might precipitate an earlier review of the leadership. When the time comes, Sir Robert might even be tempted to try his luck again, unlikely though such a turnabout appears today. With these provisions, the course seems set for the National Party leadership to change hands early next year. In recent days this has become the almost inescapable outcome of the chain of events that began when Sir Robert called for an election. To this extent, Sir Robert has been the author of his own fate, though the result in November must have been the same if the election had been then. He chose to go to the polls; he sought to make leadership the central issue of the campaign; having lost the election he reacted peevishly on the foreign exchange question, to the dismay of his supporters and the outrage of his opponents. With apparent shrewdness, the National Party caucus has not been stampeded into a graceless scourging of scapegoats. The mood was present in some quarters, but cooler heads have prevailed. It will not have escaped the attention of party elders — nor the attention of the likely successors to Sir Robert — that the Opposition benches will be in for a pretty torrid time once Parliament sits in four or five weeks. Much of the new Government’s thrust will be levelled at National’s handling of the economy

in the last eight years. As the architect of the policies the country has followed in these years, Sir Robert as Leader of the Opposition will be best placed to defend these policies, or answer for them; another in the leader’s seat might lack the same enthusiasm or as complete a grasp of the niceties that Sir Robert can be counted on to muster. Further, if the National Party wants to change tack, it will take time to work out a new course. By yesterday’s decision, significant responsibilities have been left firmly on Sir Robert’s shoulders. Two other considerations may have played a part in the caucus decision. One is that the caucus contains eight new members, although

one is not new to Parliament and has returned after a break. These new members, whose votes ' could decide who will be the leader and deputy leader of the party, will be better able to make a choice after they have been in Parliament for a while and have come to know what they need most from a leader and have come to know better the candidates offering. A more measured succession, without haste that could be misread as panic, is fairly obviously in the party’s interests. The other factor that could have swayed some members of the caucus is loyalty: theirs and Sir Robert’s. Sir Robert has proved himself intensely loyal to colleagues and allies, accepting criticism and scorn in the process. He has been repaid in kind. The caucus decision has been quite deft. Sir Robert has not been denied the consideration due to him from a once-adulatory party that still has reason to be grateful for past services. Nevertheless, and quite obvious to all, he has been shown the writing on the wall. This notice will do much to moderate or dispose of discord at the party’s imminent conference. Knowing that matters are in hand for a change in leadership, delegates to the conference may be persuaded to treat it as Sir Robert’s farewell conference rather than his summary dismissal. The succession and the policy-making should be the smoother for the cooler deliberation that the delay allows, and Sir Robert will have the opportunity and duty of answering, within the party, the critics of his administration. Whether Sir Robert merely relinquishes the leadership next year, or announces his retirement from politics, his stamp remains on the experience of a generation of New Zealanders and will help shape politics in this country for some time yet.