Some Light Shed, But Little New In Full Report (Press, 17 April 1978)

The article discusses the findings of Sir Alfred North regarding the Moyle affair, which culminated in the resignation of former Minister of Agriculture, Mr C. J. Moyle, from Parliament. It highlights the significance of publishing the full North report, which sheds light on how Sir Alfred reached his conclusions and the interactions of those involved. Key questions raised include whether there was a breach of confidentiality regarding the police file, inconsistencies in Mr Moyle's accounts, the ignorance of his colleagues, and the adequacy of Sir Alfred's investigation. Sir Alfred's investigation concluded that there was no breach of confidentiality concerning the police file on Mr Moyle. However, it became apparent that Mr Moyle had provided inconsistent statements regarding his actions to both police and Parliament. Sir Alfred examined the relationships among prominent figures involved, noting that Mr M. A. Connelly, the then Minister of Police, failed to inform Prime Minister Mr Rowling about critical details relating to an incident on 17 June 1975. During his questioning of Mr Connelly, Sir Alfred found that Connelly's responses became unhelpful, as he repeatedly denied having seen documents that could be classified as the police file. Senior police officials were exonerated from claims of breaching confidentiality; in contrast, Sir Alfred dismissed Mr Moyle's allegations against Deputy Commissioner of Police Mr R. J. Walton, which suggested a "dirty tricks" campaign aimed at undermining the Labour Government. While Mr Muldoon, the Prime Minister, denied having seen the police file, he acknowledged receiving details about the incident from a journalist shortly after it occurred. Sir Alfred's investigation did not continue to pursue the source of public rumours about Mr Moyle, despite substantial evidence confirming their truth. Throughout the report, Mr Moyle’s anxiety was evident, leading to further scrutiny of his inconsistent explanations for the discrepancies between his statements to the police and Parliament. Ultimately, Sir Alfred judged Mr Moyle based on these inconsistencies rather than his attempts to clarify his actions, concluding that the anxiety driving Moyle's response seemed primarily motivated by a fear of lying to his parliamentary colleagues. The article also briefly mentions allegations of a pro-National "dirty tricks" group prior to the 1975 General Election, though it notes that the initial incident leading to the Moyle affair was relatively trivial compared to its eventual notoriety. Overall, the Moyle affair serves as an illustration of communication failures within the Labour Government and the complexities surrounding accountability among public officials.

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