Leadership change soon?

Press, 3 December 1985, Page 3

Leadership change soon?

From Front Page

Many of those who were critical of Mr Leay and Mrs Wood but who did not support Sir Robert have been obliged to; while many of those critical of Sir Robert who did not support Mr Leay and Mrs Wood have been obliged to. What began as an exercise in attempted scapegoating between two small factions has come to dominate everything else for National.

Mr McLay is the first victim of this hijacking of the National Party to fight out personal battles and has become the third scapegoat. It is highly likely that there will be more scapegoats sought and more victims found.

After its election loss last year National held its annual conference in Wellington. That was the time to discuss why National had held on in the South Island provincial seats, been fin-

ally cleaned out in the metropolitan seats, and lost ground in the North Island provincial seats. Hopes for this were choked off. Instead, a committee was set up to review the organisation of the National Party. Sitting on it was Mr Leay, who was the target of many people dissatisfied with the way the organisation had performed. This review led to a complete change in organisational structure and no change in the people at the top of it. With the advantage of hindsight, National can be said to be now paying the price for failing to address its two main problems after the election loss: 1. It needed to accommodate tensions between individuals. The easiest and probably the best way to have done this would have been to replace Mr Leay as chief executive and Sir Robert as leader. Both replacements would have eased the tensions, however

unpleasant for those involved, and needed to be simultaneous.

2. It needed to identify which policies or lack of policies had led to the falling away in voter support. What was needed was not a review of the organisation but of the philosophies and policies National espoused.

Neither was done. Instead, National has become seen more and more as a party in which individuals attack each other and do not share common goals. In essence, National is seen as a coterie of squabbling rivals rather than as an alternative Government, hence its low rating as a party in the opinion polls. People within National say the polls reflect public ignorance over the Labour Government’s handling of the “real issues.” That, too, is scapegoating and it does not stand up to analysis. The polls show low public satisfaction with Labour’s handling of the economy, agriculture, employment, and other indicators. Yet the same polls show Labour at 17 and now 18 points ahead of National. That does not show satisfaction with Labour but dissatisfaction with National.