National dismisses claims that Simich action is 'payback'

Senior National Party figures have dismissed internal speculation that Clem Simich is being made to stand in Mangere as some sort of "pay-back" over a soured Tamaki selection deal.

Mr Simich is the sitting MP in Tamaki and last June agreed to stand aside for an electable place on the list, in return for being promised the post of Speaker in a National-led Government.

The deal also opened up a safe National seat in Auckland to some new blood.

National's northern chairman, Scott Simpson, put himself forward after years of being urged to stand for Parliament.

But embarrassingly, he was defeated in the local vote by Rangitoto College principal Allan Peachey.

It was said Mr Simich's supporters in the electorate, estimated to have comprised at least half of the 60 voting delegates, were unhappy at Mr Simich being elbowed aside and were intent on blocking Mr Simpson.

Some party sources now say Mr Simich is being required to stand in the Labour-stronghold of Mangere, one more hurdle before getting a good list position, because his people blocked Mr Simpson.

Under National's constitution, five candidates are able to be list-only and not stand in an electorate.

But even Mr Simich says he did not expect to be list-only. He said he undertook on July 28 last year - well before the Tamaki selection in October - to stand in Mangere.

Mr Simich said there was "nothing to that theory about punishment. It is not logical, it hasn't happened and I was the one who sought Mangere myself".

Mangere was the first electorate he contested, in the 1977 byelection at which David Lange was first elected.

Mr Simich's account was supported by leader Don Brash.

"My understanding was that was always what the expectation was, that he would stand in an unwinnable Labour seat to seek the party vote, and while I don't know that Mangere had ever been been firmly decided, it was certainly my expectation that it would be Mangere, from way back."

Party president Judy Kirk was more equivocal. She said it had never been agreed that Mr Simich would be list-only and it had always been an option that he would have to stand in a constituency.

She said that "the National Party for the first time is understanding MMP and how it works and the party vote is the vote that counts".

That was why the constitution now required virtually all candidates to have a constituency, to avoid an unwieldy number of candidates.