Demoted M.P.s risk expulsion

Press, 1 November 1985, Page 1

Demoted M.P.s risk expulsion

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

in Wellington

The long-simmering row between the leader of the National Party, Mr McLay, and his predecessor, Sir Robert Muldoon, blew up again yesterday. Sir Robert has been put to the bottom of National’s ranks in Parliament.

As a result Sir Robert and his long-time associate, Mr Merv Wellington, are on the verge of expulsion from the National Party. Sir Robert has been put in the lowest-ranking seat occupied by National in Parliament — No. 38. Mr Wellington will sit next to him on No. 37.

Mr Wellington is sailing even closer to the wind than Sir Robert. When told of his demotion — by the Parliamentary reporter of “The Press,” and not by Mr McLay or any of his staff — Mr Wellington announced that he would stand for his electorate of Papakura in the next General Election as an Independent National candidate. Mr McLay said Mr Wellington had not told him of his intentions, and that he might react when Mr Wellington did.

Sir Robert denied he would now lead any effort to get Mr McLay to resign, but said Mr McLay’s “irrational decision” was a sign that he could not handle the pressure and had now reached “the end of the line” as leader.

Mr McLay declined to speculate — “it would be wrong and undesirable” — on whether Sir Robert would eventually be expelled from the party. “It would be wrong of me to speculate on whether this demotion of Sir Robert is the penultimate step to going altogether, and I hope it never comes to this,” he said.

Nonetheless, in view of the events of recent weeks, Mr McLay had no compunction about relegating his predecessor and the man who was National’s Prime Minister for 8% years to the bottom seat in the hierarchy. Sir Robert had not heard of his demotion until telephoned by “The Press” at his home in Auckland. When told, he laughed. “This is the panic-stricken reaction of a thoroughly frightened man, and McLay now has to go because National has no chance of winning an election with him as leader,” he said. “This is the latest in a series of thoroughly irrational reactions; and there is an old saying, ‘Those whom

the gods would destroy they first drive mad’.” Sir Robert said Mr McLay’s decision was a “crazy” reaction which indicated that he was totally unfit to lead the National Party, and he felt the reaction would amaze members of the National caucus when they heard about it. He had seen a lot of politicians come and go during his 25 years in Parliament, but he had not seen anyone quite as foolish as Mr McLay. It was a foolish move and would be seen as such by party people and the public. Sir Robert said he was sorry to hear of Mr Wellington’s decision to stand as an independent candidate. “The resuscitation of the National Party has got to come from within,” he said. “I would certainly expect to see some branches passing votes of no confidence in various people and that might bring some of them to their senses.” Mr McLay was provoked into demoting Sir Robert when he heard that Sir Robert had said at a news conference that National had the weakest front bench in Opposition for 25 years. “Last week I said that all members of my National caucus had accepted my requirement that they be loyal to the party and its leadership, and that they cease making public attacks on the caucus,” Mr McLay said.

After he had told Sir Robert yesterday morning that he did not intend to promote him to the front bench, Sir Robert had made “a wholly unjustified attack on all those who are presently on the front bench.” This had led him to de-

mote Sir Robert to seat No. 38, the bottom place, and to shift Mr Wellington to sit' next to him.

Mr McLay said he offered Sir Robert a spokesmanship but this was rejected. Mr McLay did not agree that it was he who had brought matters to a head, and said that that was not a reasonable reading of the events of recent weeks. In the places of Sir Robert and Mr Wellington, he has promoted Mr Winston Peters (Tauranga), which has led to the consequent promotions of Mr Simon Upton (Raglan) and Mr Doug Graham (Remuera).

Mr Wellington’s first comments were that he was surprised to learn of his demotion from the news media, and was flattered at the company he was being asked to keep. He thought Mr McLay had badly misread feelings about Sir Robert within National and in the community, and described Sir Robert’s demotion as “impetuous and petty.” It was sad for National and the country that circumstances had come together leading to Sir Robert’s demotion and his own intention to stand as; an Independent, but he had thought it through very clearly. Mr Wellington said his sole concern during “this saga” had been to ensure that Sir Robert was in a position to play a full part in National Party affairs.

Last week he had said he would stand as an Independ-

ent National candidate if Sir Robert were suspended or reprimanded, and that was what he planned to do. Mr Wellington said he had never been concerned about his own political career, which had begun with his election to Parliament in 1975 and led to almost six years in the Cabinet as Minister of Education.

He denied that he had any plan to lead a breakaway National group, and he did not expect anyone to follow his lead. A question as to whether he would reconsider his decision if National had another leader remained unanswered, but he said he would not have made his decision had Mr McLay not made such a bad decision for the National Party. . As to whether Sir Robert might have been disloyal in his criticisms, Mr Wellington said it was important that these things be said and that New Zealanders appreciated being told the situation frankly. “I don’t expect to stand down from the National caucus or to resign,” he said. “I want to continue to attend the caucus and I have never thought that the people I have worked with for so long would ask me to leave the caucus.” In a foretaste of battles still to be fought, Mr Wellington said it was strange for Mr McLay to talk about “loyalty” when he had been one of the “Colonels” in 1980 when the Government and the Cabinet had had a “fist full of problems’? with the second oil shock.