page 11

Editorial

Friday night, May 1 — and we have just witnessed a demonstration of 10,000 Wellingtonians opposed to the proposed Springbok rugby tour of New Zealand.

Such a massive turnout in Wellington, and around the country, is a reflection of two things: the depth of the feeling against the tour, and the excellent work done by Hart, the May 1st Mobilisation Committee and, on our own campus, the Anti-Apartheid Club.

There can be no doubt that a broad united front has been constructed against the tour. As ex-All Black Ken Gray pointed out at last Monday's forum, it has now become quite socially acceptible to oppose the tour. Indeed, churches, business groups, students, trade unions, sports bodies, city councils, political bodies — even the Prime Minister — have all expressed their opposition to the South Africans coming here. The strength of the anti-tour movement lies in the depth of this united front.

After tonight's show of strength, it is now the responsibility of the Government to step in and stop the tour. Two factors justify such action: demonstrable public opposition, and the immense harm the tour would cause our international standing and future international sporting contacts.

Quite obviously the Rugby Union is committed to the tour; a fact which confirms the necessity of government intervention.

While perceived electoral success will affect the National Government's decision, so do the potential actions of workers and their unions. It will be interesting to watch the outcome of this week's FoL national conference discussion on anti-tour action. Undoubtedly, trade union action against the tour should prove a powerful weapon.

Again at the forum early last Monday, Trevor Richards told students that the tour is stoppable, right up until the team touches down at the airport. Quite correctly, he points out that our effort must be concentrated on stopping the Springboks ever coming.

But the question of what action is to be taken if the team does arrive, is still a hurdle to be crossed by the anti-tour movement. Clearly, there will be massive opposition to the team — but in what way will it be chanelled? To what degree is disruption to be used?

The key aspect in making the decision is that the real strength of the anti-tour movement, as mentioned above, is its wide popular base. At all costs, this must be preserved.

Trevor Richards emphasised, at the forum and again on tonight's march, that May 1 was only the 'start of the rest of the campaign' to halt the Springbok tour. If that's true, we've just witnessed quite a start.

Stephen A'Court