Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 30, No. 6. 1967.

bad tactics slowing way to reform

bad tactics slowing way to reform

Tony Haas describes moves at the recent conference as

Whether left right or centre in New Zealand politics interest has to be maintained in the effectiveness of the countervailing forces in the two party system.

As an opposition and potential government, the Labour Party has displayed signs of inadequacy for too long. What can be done—what is being done about it?

Careless tactics by reforming groups at and before the Labour Party conference, apparently slowed down other reform proposals and many have put others still further back.

Responsibility, but not blame for this must be apportioned among younger. university based or oriented Aucklanders along with a smattering of forward thinking individuals throughout the country Their work was done under the wing of the excommunicate Auckland Regionel Advisory Council.

Mention has been made elsewhere of Mr. Kirk's criticism of mutual intolerance between universities and unions, word is trickling out of the fate of the reform proposals presented to. and rejected by the party's governing conference. Now it seems, hard thought is to be given in a number of quarters as to how benefit all round ran be salvaged from the wreck.

In what one senior party member has described as an "unconstitutional act." an ill-fated "Red Book" containing some of the reform ideas was drawn up some months ago. He was preoccupied with an unconstitutional act, in the reforms being formulated outside the party framework, in formal meetings where no party members were present and with the "Red Book" being produced with party funds.

As for the reforms themselves, the rather unsubtle and consequently unwise attack on union power led to a clear retrenchment in the party hierachy.

The Red Book would have had the unions role transformed, as part of a programme to streamline the party's organisation, and to equip it to fight the way it needs to. to achieve its goals.

For those who saw it. and who were at odds with its proposals, the reaction was not one of tolerant dialogue with its composers, but a rather unharmonius train of counter defences that nearly threw the baby out with the bathwater

It cannot be denied from the advantage of hindsight that the reformers were tactless in their methods and displayed traces of political unrealism which might cost not only the party their services, but those of others who would have come after.

They should have thrown their ideas around with more of the men who mattered, with unionists in particular. Or so it is easy to suggest when one is not in the situation itself.

For, despite their political unwisdom, the reformers possibly did as much, if not more than was possible in the situation they were placed in.

Impatient like many others waiting on the sidelines for a streamlining of the Labour Party, they said what might if implemented achieve change but at the same time did little that would have effected their plans.

The unions are there to stay, and whether one likes this or not. they, with all their conservatism and shortsightedness, have to be lived with. As they need the Labour Party, so the Labour Party needs them so that it may have as broad a base as possible.

But that the unions must be represented in their present form is for from axiomatic.

But how does one persuade them to vote away their power? Not. evidently by behaving like bulls in China shops. At present the Universities need to energetically follow through the idea the Victoria Labour Club is now tossing about, that a dialogue must be set up between the universities and the unions. There will be some advantage too. in going around behind the power centres, and working at the various representational levels—strengthen them and restore prospects for all.

If this sounds like chastisement for the universities for being more intellectual than political, it seems to be a case of being cruel to be kind.

The one general point remains that the game Is seen not as one of ideals in the party system, but one of cold harsh political realities. So the universities to win have not only to act as "catalyst" but play at politics on the party's terms as well.

The ball is on Mr. Kirks side of the court now. He has the power, and his not so inconspicuous deputy leader Norm Douglas, with him. Douglas happened to be the foundation member of the Auckland University Princes St Branch which was key to the present reform proposals in their early stages —presumably at the time when his own sons were working on the writing of the Red Book. He was the man who suddenly turned camps, (his son with him) and left the reformers to stew in their juice, presumably again when someone put the hard word on him.

If these two, and any others in the power cluster around them have the wit to see a need for structural reform to make more efficient that which is there now, and to attract these additional votes Labour needs, then they must make the moves.

They have contact with all wings of the party and in the shuffling business, they have the opportunity to perhaps subtly, juggle the cards to bring in growth. Of course, even if one says all power to their right arms, the weights they must lift to achieve success are also of consequence. They must grapple with the deadening influence of old age not only in Parliament but among the backroom boys. Then they must work with the union leaders, who more often than not have the dual impediment of limited vision and old age.

Linked with both the union and the organisation sphere is the problematical Alan J MacDonald—a man powerfully placed close to the nerve centre as Party secretary in touch with the rank and file, the parliamentary members and that dulling hand of conservatism known formally as the National Executive. When Alan MacDonald's biography is listed in the party annals it ought to include not only details of his services to the party over the years, but that at age 69 he presented a semblance of a man who should have been pensioned off by his party at the conventional age. to play bowls full time. And the record would continue "Alan presided over the committee at the 1967 Conference that was to consider his own fate, the result could hardly be termed not coincidental." For as well as the much vaunted remit to retire MPs at 70. there was one to retire party officials at age 70—lost however, with most of the reforms.

Tied with the fate of the reform proposals is the whole question of internal debate in the party. Some would have it rigourously confined to constitutional channels thereby invoking all the conservative weapons of the organisation, so vividly displayed this May. To the party's shame, it had to cook up a specious argument to justify discussion of the reforms proposals being held in committee. In this committee, the tone by all accounts was extremely immoderate, at times hysterical, and certainly intolerant of any matter that might upset the status quo. To crown the performance were the usual bromides on "how we love the young folk" (Tom Leherer would have a wonderful time with the NZ Labour Party!).

As internal communication seemed unconducive to fresh thought, so the fixation on an anti-socialist editorial policy in the Newspapers led not only to an abuse of them, but of the political commentator in general—particularly his ad hoc offsider—the political scientist Austin Mitchell and Norman Kirk did not seem the greatest of friends, in a climate where Norman Kirk abused "baby Austins" at the earlier Fol conference, where rumours circulate that Kirk refused to be interviewed on TV by Mitchell, and where speculation ran that Mitchel could be refused access to the Party Conference.

Any prolific writer can expect his subjects to get ratty over points of detail, but the extended pursuit of any vendetta by Mr. Kirk would be folly and ingratitude at present. Mitchell has been the journalistic breeze among the cobwebs of the political system, and the Labour Party as part of it. Even it overexposed, he is a vivid communicator between rulers and the ruled.

The snide Mitchell is not the only Mitchell, and the Labour Party could well acknowledge same.