Radical strategies needed, says M.P.

Press, 28 November 1984, Page 8

Radical strategies needed, says M.P.

If the National Party wanted to remain a contemn political force it had pot bold and even radical strategies, said the member of Parliament for Selwyn, Miss Ruth Richardson, in Christchurch last evening. Miss Richardson, who announced this week that she would be a candidate for the party’s deputy leadership, said that until this week its leadership debate had a “tried and tested flavour.” The leadership contenders had come from the ranks of the old National Cabinet. “Worthy though the contribution of the tried and tested team may be, a leadership mix is the only way we are going to able to broaden our electoral appeal,” she said. Her support for the deputy leadership came from those who believed that National must reach outside the ranks of the old. Cabinet team for its new leaders. Miss Richardson said that she had launched her bid for the deputy leadership with a “sense of adventurism.” She was asking her caucus col-

leagues to support a bold idea which represented a break with tradition. “My candidacy is as much the promotion of an idea as the promotion of an individual,” she said. Speaking at a Deer Farmers’ Association dinner, she said that "political deviancy” appeared to have become the norm in New Zealand. The traditional analysis of the two main parties was that National stood on the Right, espousing private enterprise, while Labour was the “socialist outfit” on the Left. The reality looked different. In the closing stages of its last three terms in office National was seen as becoming more and more politically deviant. It had made important moves that were in line with its philoS, particularly the dereon of transport and ntroduction of voluntary unionism. But in the financial arena it was characterised by intervention, freezes, and controls. The Labour Government, on the other hand, was preoccupied with liberating market forces and struc-

tural decontrol. However, Miss Richardson warned that there was a “sub-plot” running under the surface plot of the Labour Government, which was going in quite a different direction. The Achilles heel with the Government was that at the end of the day it would pay homage "to what makes Labour tick, and that is trade union power.” The only area that had not been touched by the Government’s preoccupation with market forces was the labour market. The Government was not prepared to tackle the monopoly of the labour market and the rigidity of the award system. That would flow on to an unacceptable hike in inflation. “The incomes policy shows all the signs of the trade unions thumbing their noses at the Government of the day and proceeding in a fashion that will threaten entrepreneurs and make unemployment worse.”

Miss Richardson warned deer farmers to watch future Government moves on assets tax and business tax.