Sources Of The Information (Press, 22 December 1976)

In a statement delivered on 22 December 1976, Sir Alfred reflected on the recent controversies surrounding events involving Mr Connelly, Mr Muldoon, Mr Moyle, and Prime Minister Mr Rowling. He suggested that while Mr Connelly may have thought the issue was satisfactorily resolved, such incidents often resurface unless comprehensively discussed and addressed by key individuals, such as Mr Rowling and other Cabinet members. Sir Alfred pointed out that the clarity of information received by these officials may vary based on the sources. He recounted a significant moment from November 5, where discrepancies were reported by Mr Muldoon regarding Mr Moyle's statements in Parliament compared to the police file details. In response, Mr Rowling made a statement that did not mention that Mr Connelly had been given access to a copy of the police report. Sir Alfred speculated that Mr Rowling perhaps was not fully aware of the specifics regarding Mr Connelly's access to this report or had simply forgotten about it. Sir Alfred examined the legal framework surrounding police file access for Ministers and found no formal rules governing this. He noted that the Commissioner of Police, Mr Bumside, had discretion in deciding what information to share with Ministers concerning matters of public importance, particularly those involving ministerial conduct. In this case, Mr Bumside acted appropriately by informing the Minister as deemed necessary. He deemed Mr Bumside and Mr Walton's actions as demonstrating significant restraint during a challenging situation. Sir Alfred also indicated that the inquiry ought to enhance public understanding of the benefits derived from having a police force that operates under officers of integrity. He commented on the seriousness of the allegations made by Mr Moyle against the Prime Minister, equating them to severe accusations regarding homosexual interests made against another senior Parliament member. Sir Alfred stated that both allegations were serious and, while he refrains from adjudicating which is more damaging, he noted the significant emotional reactions it provoked. Notably, Sir Alfred expressed approval for Mr Moyle's decision to apologise to the accountancy firm implicated in his accusations after the initial remarks were made under provocation. Still, he criticised Mr Moyle's later attempt to provide a different rationale for his conduct during the incident as unwise and unlikely to succeed. These reflections highlight the complexities and sensitivities surrounding political accountability and the management of information within government structures during that period in New Zealand.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand