Sir Robert rejects Mr McLay’s offer

Press, 1 November 1985, Page 4

Sir Robert rejects Mr McLay’s offer

By OLIVER RIDDELL in Wellington The row about where Sir Robert Muldoon is to sit in Parliament, and whether his criticisms of Mr McLay and National’s leadership constituted disloyalty, has been simmering for some months. As Mr McLay’s rating declines in the public opinion polls, while Sir Robert’s stays high, and as National fails to provide effective Opposition to the Government.in Parliament, Sir Robert’s supporters continue to lobby strenuously for his promotion. This led to talks between the two men — talks which Sir Robert had described as leading towards his promotion to the front bench, which in turn had been denied by Mr McLay. Early yesterday morning, Mr McLay called Sir Robert to his office. Mr McLay’s account of it was that this

was in response to Sir Robert’s request that his wish to play a wider role in the National Party caucus be reconsidered.

Mr McLay said he had stated earlier that any National member of Parliament who wanted a spokesmanship would be given one, provided that member was prepared to act in accordance with the conventions and standards of "acceptable caucus behaviour.” “I therefore told Sir Robert that I was prepared to offer him a spokesmanship but that it was only fair to tell him that there was no possibility of that role including a front bench position,” Mr McLay said. “I made it clear that this was my final decision on his specific request that he be given a seat on the front bench. He, in turn, made it clear he will refuse any offer that does not include a front bench seating position.

“I must conclude that Sir Robert will only take a job on his terms,” Mr McLay said. “That is not acceptable. It was not the way he ran his caucus; it is not the way that I run mine.” Under those circumstances, it was not now appropriate for him to make Sir Robert any offer. During the last few days Mr McLay has canvassed opinion within the party organisation and, following the practice of Sir Robert when he was leader, had sought the views of all National members through the Chief Whip, Mr Don McKinnon. Mr McLay said these views had not in any way influenced his final decision—which he had made before he had the results. He had sought other views because it was important that Sir Robert knew that, in each case, a substantial majority had op-

posed his being given a front bench position. When asked to comment on Mr McLay’s decision, Sir Robert shrugged his shoulders and said it had been Mr McLay’s decision to make. “He sees no merit in having me on the front bench or in having to replace someone on the front bench,” Sir Robert said. He had declined Mr McLay’s offer for two reasons. First, there was no attraction in sitting at No. 10 which was “a retirement seat” and had “coNnotations of retirement hanging over it.” Second, Mr McLay had offered him the spokesmanship on transport, an area with which he had no affinity and which held no attraction for him. Sir Robert said he had also rejected transport because its spokesman was Mr Winston Peters (Tauranga)

who was one of the more effective speakers in the Opposition, and who was doing, a particularly good job because he was one of the few who could handle the Minister of Transport, Mr Prebble. “If I do the job—getting rid of this Labour Government—as it needs to be done, then I need to be on the front bench to catch the Speaker’s eye, and where I can see the whites of the eyes of the fellows opposite,” he said. Mr Peters said he was “not too fussed” about having Sir Robert offered his transport spokesmanship. He said he had been offered “something more substantial” in its place, but would •not say what. “Any moves to assist the organisation of the National Party in Parliament have my support,” Mr Peters