National Party Club starts their first activity for 1977

In his article on the National Party Conference ("Salient". 1 August. 1977). David Murray refers to "a remit which was, somewhat surprisingly, allowed to reach the Conference [and] demanded the opening up of information from the public service in an attempt at what may be laughingly described as 'open Government"'. Mr Murray may like to explain why this was surprising or laughable.

Mr Murray's reporting comes further unstuck as he goes on to say, wrongly, that the remit was lost.

There were actually two remits on this subject before the Conference. A remit on open Government came from Wellington Young Nationals, and was debated by the full Conference. It asked "that the Government examine its legislation and procedures to ensure that as much unformation as possible, consistent with the security of the nation and the need to protect confidentiality of personal information, is made available to the public, with the objective of ensuring open Government". This remit was passed by the Conference with a substantial majority.

A second remit called for the promotion of a Freedom of Information Bill. This probably envisaged something similar to the Prebble Bill, which had been thrown out of the House a few weeks previously. It was debated by a remit committee, comprising about a quarter of the delegates, and was narrowly defeated.

Mr Murray may also be able to explain what he meant by his conclusion that the alleged loss of the remit indicated "the National Party members are not overly dissillusioned (sic) by Parliamentary forms of Government". The call for more open Government was concerned with the bureaucracy fo the civil service. Such bureaucracy is not necessarily inherent in the Parliaments system. Mr Murray's conclusion seems not only confused, but also irrelevant.