KNOWING WHO WE ARE

  • Jim Bolger
Prime Minister

NEW PLYMOUTH

Greetings to Party President Geoff Thompson, Divisional Chairman Malcolm Law and Barbara Law, Ministers, MPs, delegates, ladies and gentlemen.

Thank you for the effort you put in in the lead up to and since our first MMP election.

This Central Division performed well in the new environment.

A special thanks to my own Taranaki King Country team led by Shane Ardern.

They were great and produced the highest percentage National Party list vote in the country.

Last week at the Auckland Division Conference, I spoke about the growing importance and role of communities in building the `social capital' of a nation.

About how power is and should flow from the centre back to regions and how this might impact on the role of local government and community agencies.

Today I want to speak to you also about the importance of 'knowing who we are as a nation'; a subject which has both a social and an economic impact.

But first, I would like to speak briefly of the present situation in Parliament.

When New Zealand voted for the MMP system they were voting for a new constitutional framework which would change the House of Representatives forever.

In part they were voting for a new political order; one which took wider and more diverse considerations to its very core.

And they have got it.

The 61 member Coalition Government includes:

13 women;
8 Maori - including representatives of all five Maori electorates;
one Pacific Islander - Arthur Anae;
one Asian - Pansy Wong; and
New Zealand and probably the Commonwealth's youngest Minister - Deborah Morris.
New Zealanders voted for a new political order, which would give rise to new voices, new forces.

They achieved that.

The Coalition Government which we formed is a reflection of that new political order.

It is a new and vibrant creation - not without its difficulties.

We all recognise that some have made mistakes but I want to say that working alongside New Zealand First day-in and day-out, I have no doubt as to their commitment to providing New Zealand with a stable and constructive centre-right Government.

The alternative was that New Zealand First helped Labour and the Alliance form a Government.

After the October election last year, New Zealand was faced with either a centre right Coalition Government led by National or a centre left Government heavily influenced by the left of the Labour Party and the Alliance.

No one should forget that.

I want to thank New Zealand First for choosing National and supporting the broad thrust of National's economic policies.

Many sectors of the media were so excited at the prospect of Helen Clark becoming Prime Minister last year that they have completely overlooked the fact that the 1996 election was a disaster for Labour.

Helen Clark moved the New Zealand Labour Party left in policy terms and lost over six per cent of their 1993 vote.

Labour's 1996 vote was the lowest percentage they have received since 1928.

The British Labour Party moved policies to the right and won in a landslide.

Although, interestingly, the British Labour vote would not enable them to govern in their own right if Britain had a proportional system of voting like MMP.

If that was the case, Britain like New Zealand would have a Coalition Government, and it is possible that such a Coalition Government would not include the Labour Party, as in New Zealand.

The lesson for New Zealand Labour from the British election is a grim one.

Going left loses votes, higher taxes lose votes, and New Zealand Labour can't move to the centre right because that's National's territory and we don't intend to move over and give it to Labour.

As we gather in New Plymouth today our focus has to be on defining National's policies for New Zealand in the 21st century, the century of the 'global village', of more open trade rules and more movement of capital to preferred locations.

To succeed in such a world will require involvement in the global economy on a scale not contemplated before, while at the same time being determined to retain our national identity.

A complex equation and to succeed will require both experience and vision, something our political opponents don't have.

I am making this challenge the focus of the five addresses which I will be giving to the Divisional Conferences this month.

I will be setting out my views on how the modern National Party should respond to the issues.

For much of this century, economic debate was dominated by the competing philosophies of free-enterprise capitalism, on the one side, and state-sponsored communism on the other.

With the fall of the former Soviet Union, capitalism clearly won; and global economic thinking reached a broad consensus about what works and what doesn't.

It is now an article of faith that a high degree of economic flexibility is crucial to maintaining the dynamic growth levels needed to create the wealth that will fund social services and meet the demand for jobs.

But we must not overlook the fact that this very flexibility is not without cost.

Rapid change can lead to social dislocation, fears for one's personal security and employment, and a loss of faith in democratic institutions.

Such change if not handled carefully can lead to the rise of slogan yelling zealots of the left or right.

To avoid that we are going to have to develop new approaches to government which will provide a new harmony between our economic and social goals.

At the Auckland Conference last week I put it this way.

In charting our path for tomorrow, we must look not only at the economy's impact on the community, but equally importantly at the community's impact on the economy.

The deregulation of financial markets, the lowering of trade barriers, and the technology and communications explosions are fast moving decision making away from Central Government.

Power and influence is flowing back to individuals and the intimate communities in which they gather - their towns, cities and regions, corporations, trade and voluntary associations, and their social organisations including their churches.

I support this redistribution of power and it will prove highly beneficial, providing that power is well exercised by those who come to inherit it at the community level.

Which in turn demands that our civic institutions are strong and healthy so that they can help build the `social capital'of society.

This has a measurable economic benefit, in the same way fiscal capital does; it too can be nurtured and accumulated, or alternatively, it can be ignored, squandered and depleted.

The question of how we go about building social capital is, I suggest, the next great political challenge; one which we must keep in our minds as we consider what the modern National Party's policy will be tomorrow.

There are four characteristics found in communities that have it: a sense of belonging, social cohesion, support systems for the family, and the nurturing of individual potential.

Where all four are found we find strong, trusting communities.

Many of the factors which contribute towards the building of a strong sense of identity and belonging are within our influence.

At a local level we must foster communities which:

demonstrate a sense of leadership, a spirit of co-operation and participation and respect for cultural diversity;

build social cohesion by providing opportunities for citizens to participate in meaningful activity, reducing the feeling of alienation and isolation;

promote the essentials of family well-being; a sense of belonging, caring and stability, a healthy start in life, and security in later years;

provide a diversity of services and activities which enhance the quality of family life, build self-reliance and reduce dependency;

encourage knowledge and skills, the dissemination of civic information, and provide employment opportunities.
In these ways they establish a virtuous circle in which civic strength, social cohesion, and a sense of trust steadily grow, producing abundant social and economic dividends.

Many of the matters I have spoken of here - such as health, education and social welfare - have traditionally been seen only as Central Government responsibilities.

But the reality is that the benefits which flow from our spending on these services can be greatly enhanced when there is both voluntary and professional participation at the local level.

What we are talking about here is working together to add value.

For those wedded to the concept of Central Government delivering all services these are very radical concepts, but to those who think carefully about the real issues we face in society and think about them in human terms they will have the ring of truth.

Certainly they are concepts our National Party will want to explore and develop as we prepare for the next century.

Today I want to concentrate on building a sure sense of belonging, of `knowing who we are' in the fast changing world I spoke of earlier.

It is, I believe, appropriate that I should speak on this subject here in New Plymouth for three reasons:

first, because this is where my own family's `New Zealand heritage' had it's beginning;

second, because the organisers of this weekend's conference have scheduled a `Population Forum'; and

third, because Taranaki will shortly be at the sharp end of Treaty settlement negotiations.
Many of the factors which contribute towards defining who we are, are well within the influence of Government.

By producing a world class economy we can share in the pride that it generates, by developing new approaches to social problems we can gain from contributing to worthwhile developments.

At another level we can engender new respect and understanding for the nation's history.

We can protect our rich heritage, promote our unique culture, cherish our diversity instead of being torn asunder by it, and more closely define the rights which every New Zealand citizen should enjoy.

We can, within certain limits, determine the size of New Zealand's population and we can elect to take a more or less active role in global affairs.

And at another level we can promote sport and the arts as a means by which we showcase ourselves to the world.

As we approach the millennium, New Zealand has an unparalleled opportunity to present the face of a modern, forward-looking, humanitarian nation to the world.

We will host the America's Cup, be the first to see in the new century, and be superbly positioned to take advantage of one of the biggest events of all - the Sydney Olympics.

It is going to require a massive effort to capitalise on the opportunities and the count down has started; we are already within a thousand days of the new millennium.

In July 1996 I established the Prime Minister's `Towards 2000' Group to provide leadership and co-ordination for the Year 2000 activities.

The Government will continue to be active in taking the lead and playing a co-ordinating role, but local communities are going to have to rally around and take their own initiatives.

Some like Gisborne - which will be the first city to see the sun and whose millennium clock is already ticking - are well advanced, and we should aim to make this an event for all New Zealand.

Tiny Pitt Island off the Chathams on which about a dozen families live, will be the first place to see the sun.

That's worthy of recognition.

Inevitably millennium events will feature sport and the arts; the great thing about these two is that they build and reflect a collective national pride.

It is a fact of life that, when the popular media of other nations mention New Zealand it is, more often than not, in some sporting context.

Sport provides another focus for us to define ourselves in the eyes of the world.

Sport and sporting events are also a very large and growing international industry.

This is why last year we announced a `high- performance' sport initiative which included $4 million of additional Government funding.

In the arts we also have a significant presence on the world stage.

New Zealanders enjoy outstanding international success - from the Finn brothers to Dame Malvina Major and Kiri Te Kanawa, Jane Campion to Roger Donaldson and Peter Jackson, from Frances Hodgkins to Sir Donald McIntyre, Katherine Mansfield, Maurice Gee, Janet Frame and many many others.

That's one level of defining who we are.

At an entirely different level I welcome the fact that New Zealand is beginning an intelligent debate about New Zealand's constitutional status.

How do we want to see ourselves, how do we want to identify ourselves in tomorrow's world?

Here there are two forces at work - economic integration creating the 'Global Village' for trading, counter balanced by a strong desire to have a distinct cultural identity so as not to be overpowered and lost in a world of billions of people.

This is an important debate which is not about being against the past or present but about being what is right for the future.

My own view, as is well known, is that we are well advanced on the long journey from a dependent colony to the status of an independent republic within the Commonwealth.

This is a debate that our neighbour Australia is having as well, and I was pleased that last week Labour leader Helen Clark said that she believed it was inevitable that New Zealand would eventually become a republic.

I welcome that statement of support because it confirms that in New Zealand this is not a party political issue but one for all New Zealanders to be involved in.

New Zealand's journey to nationhood began in 1840 and has been one of constant evolution since then.

A key milestone on the way was on the 6 September 1948 when the British Nationality and New Zealand Citizenship Act was assented to.

It established New Zealand citizenship for the first time.

Before that New Zealanders were British subjects only, and in constitutional terms fought overseas in the two World Wars as British subjects not New Zealand citizens.

I make no prediction as to when our journey to nationhood will be completed, but whatever happens I am certain New Zealand will want to remain a member of the Commonwealth - where already the majority of members have their own Head of State.

Britain itself is on the road to constitutional reform.

The new Labour Government's platform included re-establishing a Parliament in Scotland, devolving some authority to a new Welsh assembly and electoral reform of the House of Lords.

If it is good enough for Britain to review its constitutional arrangements then we should not be afraid of doing so either - including the issue of our National Day.

After the major disruption at the Waitangi Day celebrations at Waitangi in 1995 there was a cry for a new National Day.

A day on which all New Zealanders could share a sense of nationhood.

The options ranged from renaming Waitangi Day to establishing a new day on which to celebrate all that is good in New Zealand.

Following this year's very successful ANZAC Day there were calls to make ANZAC Day our National Day.

I don't support that.

I believe ANZAC Day has a very special place in our history and should remain as is.

Neither do I support changing the name of Waitangi Day again.

The Treaty of Waitangi is a most significant part of our country's history and should be recognised by a special day.

That said, I do support a separate "New Zealand Day" on which we could all celebrate who we are, our culture, our diversity and enjoy ourselves.

Such a day could be the 6th September for the reasons I outlined earlier.

The day New Zealand citizenship was established for the first time is a very significant day in our history.

However I am inclined to the view expressed by former Governor-General Dame Catherine Tizard that a simpler approach might be to rename Labour Day, New Zealand Day.

The day is already established in the calendar, the historic reasons for Labour Day are fading from memory.

The prescription for an eight hour day was removed from legislation in 1991.

Under this proposal we would retain Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day as at present and just replace Labour Day with New Zealand Day.

A day that is inclusive of everyone. I look forward to the debate.

I mentioned that Taranaki is where we Bolgers put down our New Zealand roots during the years of the Great Depression - in 1930 at Opunake to be precise.

My parents like other immigrants, brought their own skills and customs, and prospered by dint of hard work and the warm Taranaki welcome they received.

A unifying factor among all New Zealanders is a migrant history - from when the first waka beached on these shores to today's new arrivals - there is a common thread of people looking for a better life free of prejudice and hardship.

From time immemorial migration has followed the caravans of trade, and the current decade has proved no exception.

Since 1990 our exports into Asian markets have increased by 60% and, as a result, we now have no less than fourteen embassies and trade offices in the region.

As these markets become increasingly important to us, more New Zealanders are being found in Asia, and more Asians are being found in New Zealand.

Indeed, earlier this year, Parliament welcomed to it's ranks our first Asian-New Zealand MP, National's Pansy Wong; we are proud to have her.

Immigration is a matter of high public interest and thus we have scheduled a population conference for October this year at which interested parties can contribute and have their say.

The aim is to produce an enlightened, liberal but firm, population policy.

Migration has had a huge influence on who we are, but it is up to the New Zealanders of this generation to decide who we will become.

In that regard, I would like to spend a few moments on the subject of Treaty claims; a matter that is going to be very much in the public eye in Taranaki in coming months.

Martin Luther King, who did more than anyone of his generation to overcome racial segregation in his country and to help his fellow African-Americans to define who they were, once said:

``I don't want to be the white man's brother-in-law, I want to be his brother.''

The Maori people are saying something very similar to us today; but the establishing of the bonds of brotherhood demands that we all recognise the realities of the past.

Neither Maori nor non-Maori should ever fall into the trap of assuming that all of this is a one-way street.

The Treaty granted arriving immigrants the right to settle peacefully in New Zealand; and in 1997 it gives non-Maori New Zealanders their rightful standing here.

This is something that everyone needs to understand.

The Treaty of Waitangi gives all New Zealanders the right to be here.

The Treaty belongs to Maori and non-Maori alike; both must honour it, for it defines the rights we share.

The final element of who we are is found in the manner in which we present ourselves to the world.

We, as a nation, have already shown the world we are not afraid to tackle the hard issues - the challenge is to continue to honour that tradition.

New Zealand is deeply committed to helping reduce international conflict, promoting peace and encouraging unrestricted international trade.

It is a mark of our growing stature that the past weeks have seen visits to our shores by the Leaders of two of the world's most powerful economies - Prime Minister Hashimoto of Japan and Chancellor Kohl of Germany.

They came as friends to renew acquaintances, and perhaps to learn a little from New Zealand's experience.

Our reputation as an international citizen has never been higher.

It has been enhanced by peacekeeping missions in Bosnia, Kuwait, Somalia, Haiti, Mozambique, Angola and Cambodia.

As we grapple this year with decisions on future defence spending, we shall ensure that New Zealand's defence force retains the capability to carry out peacekeeping, as well as more traditional defence roles.

We play a key role in the global environmental debate; including in climate change, the protection of whales and Antarctica.

We will continue to strive for disarmament and the elimination of nuclear weapons.

When we take a stance on such global issues, we in effect articulate both our values and our identity.

I see my role as providing leadership by articulating goals, visions and values, and by working together we will foster a sense of sturdy nationhood.

In closing, I would like to relate the concept of knowing who we are back to the tasks that face the National Party today.

We must develop policies which build on our economic success by building up the social capital of New Zealand.

We must encourage the development of strong communities because only by doing that will we reduce the sense of isolation many feel in today's fast moving world.

Our goal must be to bring warmth into our communities again.

To achieve this will require that we are open to new and perhaps radical approaches; to understand the New Zealand of tomorrow.

Conservative parties have often failed that test in the past - in this case we must succeed.

We are going to need the input and ideas of every single member of the party - I urge you to participate in what will be stimulating debates.

To ensure you can, we must re-gear our party organisation to the realities of an MMP-based democracy, where all future Governments will be Coalition Governments.

This is the important task in which Jim McLay and his team are engaged - again, we wish them well in their task.

By doing all these things and doing them well we too will better understand the past, enrich the present and meet the challenges of the future.

Have a great conference.

Thank you.

Ends.