FAMILY WELL-BEING

NELSON

Greetings to Party President Geoff Thompson, Divisional Chairman Bernard Duncan and Jane, delegates, ladies and gentlemen.

My first task is to thank all of you for the time and effort you put in for the National Party.

It is your commitment and the results it achieved that enabled us to be in the position to form and lead the new Coalition Government.

Today I want to talk to you about families; how we can work to ensure their well-being, and their role in strengthening the broader community.

It's a subject I have some experience of and I agree with the man who said:

"All happy families resemble one another, but each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

We all know that unhappy families undermine the strength and cohesion of the community, and in doing so contribute to the weakening of society as a whole.

On the other hand strong family structures make a major contribution to the foundations of both the local communities and the nation as a whole.

My discussion on families should be seen in the context of the speeches I am giving to Divisional Conferences about the sweeping changes that are occurring in society, how these will impact on the political system, and how you can make a difference if you get involved.

When New Zealanders voted for the MMP system in 1993 they were voting for a new constitutional framework which would change the House of Representatives forever.

New Zealanders voted for a new political order, which would give rise to new voices, new forces.

Many now don't like what they voted for and would prefer the old order of single party Governments.

Well I am sorry with MMP that's gone forever.

All future Governments will be Coalition Governments.

That being so we will have to work harder to inform and educate the public that the formation of a Coalition Government will always require give and take on policy issues.

That would have been so no matter who we formed a Coalition with.

No one party is going to have all its policy accepted.

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

As the governing party which led New Zealand through some difficult and some unpopular change, we did very well to retain our vote last October.

That was despite in the end losing the six per cent we had hoped to gain to ACT, as a direct result of National leaning voters looking to create a coalition partner.

In the event our coalition partner came from the centre in the form of New Zealand First.

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

As we gather here today, the New Zealand National Party is engaged in three historic tasks; they are:

to redefine our beliefs and how they should be presented in the complex world of the 21st century;

to develop dynamic new policies that keep us moving forward; and

to re-gear our party organisation to the realities of an MMP-based democracy.
That is to say that we are involved in an important process of renewal; something that is entirely appropriate for a party that has won three elections in a row and now must plan its policy programme in the knowledge that Coalition Governments are here to stay.

The question of developing new policies in my view must include looking at the future role of the State in a world where we are all part of the 'Global Village'.

The Party's future depends on its ability to relate to its constituency in a way that is relevant and contemporary.

While remaining true to our core beliefs we will need to be open to new ideas, ideas that acknowledge the radically changed nature of society.

A society that is more culturally diverse than ever before.

The welcome addition of New Zealand's first Asian MP Pansy Wong and a second Pacific Island MP - our own Arthur Anae - together with the 13 Maori MPs are evidence of the changing composition of New Zealand's population.

We also need policy ideas that are attractive to a New Zealand society with much higher levels of education, knowledge and expectation.

To citizens who are increasingly concerned not just with their personal economic well-being, but also with the quality of life provided by the community.

The saying - money can't buy you happiness but it's a comfortable second best - is no longer so funny.

Now an increasing number of people are reaching a degree of affluence that their parents or grandparents could not have dreamed of, and they are coming to realise there's something in the old adage.

That it's no good having a six figure salary if the roads are constantly jammed, if you can't breath fresh clean air, if you can't walk down the street at night for fear of being mugged, or if you spend your time worried sick about your kids and whether they are getting on drugs.

The modern world is now correctly demanding successful social solutions as well as economic answers.

How do we build up 'social capital' as well as 'economic capital'?

But -- and this is a big 'but' -- the modern world demands solutions that do not smack of the discredited socialism of the past, because they know that didn't work.

This is at the core of the challenge.

It's why I am suggesting we have to look for new ways of working with the community.

Our task is to find answers which harmonise our economic and social goals.

That's something I am sure our supporters would want us to do.

For much of the 20th 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 collapse of the former Soviet Union, free enterprise clearly won; and global economic thinking reached a broad consensus about what works and what doesn't.

In New Zealand we have achieved much and our reform programme has been admired by many, but today I am calling on the National Party to look anew at tomorrow's options.

And when we look at policies we must look not only at the economy's impact on the community, but also 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 in very many areas of economic activity.

The days when a Prime Minister could, or thought he could, decree most things in life, are long gone.

Now we must look to the development of policies in the social area which continue to devolve power and decision-making out to the community.

This challenge fits like a glove to the core values of the National Party; it reaches back to the way civic society operated before the arrival of Big Government.

With the failure of centralised planning, concepts based on the importance of the community are being presented in new language.

The economist Francis Fukuyama uses the term: 'The Art of Association'.

Where it is present we will find cohesion and civic trust - referred to as social capital - which has a measurable economic benefit, in the same way fiscal capital does.

It can be nurtured, accumulated and stored away for a rainy day; or alternatively, it can be ignored, squandered and depleted.

Building this social capital is, I suggest, the next great political challenge; one which we must keep foremost in our minds as we consider what the modern National Party's policies will be.

There are four characteristics which are found in communities that have it.

They are:

a sure sense of belonging;

strong social cohesion;

support systems for the family; and

the nurturing of individual potential.
Where all four are found we find strong, trusting communities.

I raised the first issue of a sense of belonging, in New Plymouth last week where I talked about the development of our young country, how passports identifying our New Zealand citizenship were first issued only a short 50 years ago, and how I expected to see the further development of our country's constitutional framework.

In Palmerston North this morning I talked about how we can build communities that 'have their acts together'.

Of how much more community involvement was essential if we were going to make progress in areas from education to crime prevention.

This afternoon, as I said, I want to discuss the family.

There is an old Chinese saying:

Man is the head of the family and woman the neck that turns the head.

Perhaps a more relevant observation by Fukuyama was:

"A strong and stable family structure and durable social institutions cannot be legislated into existence the way a Government can create a central bank or an army.

A thriving civil society depends on a peoples' habits, customs and ethics, attributes that can be shaped only indirectly through conscious political action and must otherwise be nourished through an increased awareness and respect for culture."

The greatest blessings I have known in my life have been those of the family; my own family and the one into which I was born.

My parents arrived in Taranaki in 1930; migrants from a rural community in County Wexford in the south of Ireland.

The last thing they would have contemplated as they settled in as farm workers was that their son might one day become Prime Minister of their adopted nation.

That I was able to aspire to the job was in no small measure due to the fact that ours was a family that nurtured human and religious values, that encouraged participation in the community and encouraged a strong work ethic.

My mother who celebrated her 95th birthday this year would say that hard work never killed anyone and she practised what she preached - she worked hard.

Even more important were the clearly developed and firmly held values she handed on to her family.

Values that emphasised being responsible for your decisions.

Not every New Zealand child is going to grow up in the same environment, but they all have the potential to make an important contribution in life, providing they get a decent start.

What worries me is that for an increasing number of them that is getting more and more difficult:

30% of New Zealand children (some 268,000) now live in benefit-dependent families - compared to only 12% in 1985;

76% of beneficiary children live in sole-parent families;

on present trends domestic purposes beneficiaries will outstrip those on the unemployment benefit before the year 2000; and

we now have families who are into their third generation of welfare dependency.
You all know people in some of the dependent situations of which I have just spoken.

The problem is not going away, it is growing.

Marriages are less stable, stress levels are higher and more families, especially children, are hurt by this.

The State has to play a role but in my view it will only achieve successful outcomes if it actively involves the wider family and the community.

Here again there has to be a sharing of responsibility.

The old socialist model of leaving it to the State doesn't work.

Over the years of the development of our modern society we have given much attention to individual and community rights.

In my view it is now necessary to reinforce the responsibilities that go with rights, especially with regards to family responsibilities, especially with regards to parents' responsibilities to their children.

The aim must be to build self-reliance and reduce dependency.

We can do this by promoting a new sense of belonging, stability and caring, by providing the appropriate resources and paying special attention to the needs of both the young and the elderly.

We know the majority of individuals find their greatest sense of belonging within the family unit.

Where the sense of belonging is absent, both the family unit and the community itself are vulnerable to breakdown.

Government can help and indeed this is the focus of the "Strengthening Families Project" which the Government is working on.

This effort which is in the developmental stage is spread across many departments and is designed to better co-ordinate the delivery of support and, in particular, to give people the opportunity to move to greater independence.

The Ministers of Welfare, Health and Education are very supportive of the strategy, and the CEOs of all three departments are working together on the project.

It makes sense to integrate this work because many of the children and families that come to one department for help also go to other agencies.

In delivering more relevant help we must lower the barriers between agencies so that the left hand knows what the right hand is doing.

The approach will be to try and tailor-make support for each individual family.

The idea is to ensure better social, health and educational results for at-risk and dependent families and to break the cycles of disadvantage.

A strength of the new approach is that it will be more community-based.

Some relatively new programmes are already in place.

'Home Instruction by Parents of Pre-school Youngsters', or HIPPY as it is commonly known, is a home based educational scheme for four and five year olds that runs in conjunction with the Family Service Centres.

We also have the 'Parents As First Teachers' programme which is a world leader.

It has been introduced to provide parents with the information and support they need to give their children the best possible start in life.

This year's target is to have 6,000 children enrolled in the programme and it's the Government's wish that Parents as First Teachers will eventually be expanded to include all parents requiring this assistance.

These schemes and others recognise that a huge portion of our social spending could be a saved if our families gave their children a healthier, better educated start in life, underpinned with a clear set of values.

In particular we could save many, many millions in what is described as 'negative spending'; that's the money we spend on our prisons, addiction and truancy services and so on.

Almost invariably, when we look at young people in trouble we find problems in the family; and this does not just apply to economically disadvantaged families.

Increasingly there are concerns about youth behaviour in some of the most affluent communities.

When I talk about social capital in society the most important component is our children.

They are the nation's future and the great news is that the great majority get on with the demands of school education and work in a commendable manner.

The pressure and demands are higher but they cope.

For those who don't cope we have to have better answers.

Because health plays such an important part in determining both the well-being of the family and of our communities, we have taken some new steps.

This week the Government concluded negotiations to introduce its policy of providing free health care for under six year olds.

This move will clearly not only benefit children but also remove a financial worry from parents.

Also this year a dedicated Chief Advisor of Child Health will be appointed to provide independent policy advice.

We have a Commissioner for Children whose task is to promote the interests of the young, investigate complaints and monitor services for children.

The Commissioner pays very special attention to the position of Maori children for it is here that many of the serious problems occur.

It seems that iwi social service programmes, which enable Maori whanau to take responsibility for the care and protection needs of their children and young people, work more effectively than other programmes.

Again confirming the importance of having the family and community involved.

Everything we seek to do here can, however, be destroyed when the dark shadow of the drug culture is cast over the life of a young man or woman.

Again we must act together. We must also act together in education.

I am especially impressed with the results of the direct resourcing of schools.

It is a classic example of a sensible policy to hand back considerable authority to the local community to manage their own schools for their children.

It works very well and must be encouraged, but here's the rub.

It is totally opposed by the groups wedded to Big Government - the teacher unions and the Labour and Alliance Parties.

That lovely cohort of yesterday's thinkers are fearful of losing control.

Put simply they don't trust the community.

My message is the opposite - we must trust the community.

I visit many schools and see and feel the new vitality among teachers and Boards of Trustees who have accepted the challenge of managing their own affairs.

They spend their money wisely and make good decisions.

It's a classic example of giving power back to communities and it works.

We must make it clear to teacher unions that the direct resourcing of schools will remain as an option, and it is an option which I hope many more communities will accept.

Finally, no obligation weighs heavier on families and communities than the need to respect, care and provide security for the elderly in our society.

The first old age pension system in the world was introduced in the time of Premier Dick Seddon and we have been debating the nature of what is appropriate ever since.

Today there is again vigorous debate as to how we can and should proceed.

Only one fact is unchallenged; in the future there will be a doubling of the number of people in retirement and providing for them will be very costly, indeed not only for their income needs but equally for their health needs.

In broad terms it will mean a doubling of the cost of providing income and health care for retired New Zealanders in the future.

At the heart of the present superannuation debate is the question of whether or not the State should require those who are able to save for their retirement to do so.

It's a debate that is going on in many countries including Britain, where the new Labour Minister of Social Security talked before their election about a revamp of social welfare policy - including compulsory pension contributions from everyone earning above a certain level.

The pros and cons will continue to be debated and whatever happens change will be necessary in the years ahead.

What is unique in New Zealand is that it is the public - not the political parties, not individual MPs - that will make the final decision by means of the referendum in September.

Taking such an important issue to a referendum is consistent with my call for the community to be more involved on major issues.

To that end I established last year a Prime Ministerial Task Force on Positive Ageing which has been out in the community exploring issues of concern to the aged and options for promoting positive ageing.

The Task Force is currently consulting with a wide range of people around the country on the options for promoting positive ageing.

It will report to Government by the end of June 1997.

As I said earlier, we can strengthen the family by promoting a sense of belonging, stability and caring, and by paying special attention to the needs of both the young and the elderly.

The family is the basis upon which strong communities are built.

It is parents and family members who read to young children, turn off the TV and see that the homework is done, go for walks together, kick balls around, console each other in the bad times and celebrate good times.

As the business of government becomes more complex, it seems to become more distant from the individual, perceived as unfeeling and impossible to influence.

In these circumstances people look for guidance from the micro-systems to which they belong: schools, churches, corporations, trade organisations, service and sports clubs, and the family.

My argument is that we are entering a new world in which the present power-structures must, out of necessity, be changed as we move to meet the needs of today's families.

I said at the beginning that we were engaged this weekend in three historic tasks.

All are important - but none more so than that of developing dynamic new policies that will maintain our nation's forward momentum.

What we could call the 'Millennium Agenda'.

An agenda which has to bring a greater convergence between economic and social policies.

I am certain that the only Party that can produce such an agenda and lead New Zealand into the new millennium is the National Party.

Thank you.

ENDS