Address to Wellington South Rotary Club
Noon, Tuesday 7 April 2010

Key Points:

• “… While National may be odds-on to win again next year, the dark clouds are already gathering…ACT’s right wing is already becoming impatient and has shown no hesitation in trying to throw its weight around, well beyond the limits of its electoral mandate.”

• “Kiwis do not like walking down the road of extremism. ACT is not a force Kiwis would want shaping an increasingly far right second-term National-led government.

• “(The) Maori (Party) are going to want much more than lip service and personal warmth on issues like devolution; the future role of the Treaty of Waitangi; and, closing the social and economic gaps between Maori and Pakeha. Indeed, the very future of the Maori Party will depend on its making significant progress in each of these areas.”

• “National … (will likely be) the only party capable of forming and leading a government after the 2011 election – but with partners whose core demands are likely to tear it in completely opposite directions.”

• “… Given the experience of 2002, it is a situation UnitedFuture – written off as irrelevant and politically moribund now just as we were in 2002 – is watching with some interest.”

• “(UnitedFuture) has been and is a voice for middle New Zealand families, and it is why we have endured against adversity to date.

• “I bitterly regret that we were diverted by the fundamentalist mania of a few in 2002-2005, and although those elements have long since left us, the false impression they caused that UnitedFuture was just a bunch of religious zealots with a narrow, prescriptive moralistic agenda has lingered, to our detriment. Today, I am drawing the line – those days are well behind us, and will not be repeated.”

• “I am sick and tired of hearing the values and the aspirations of middle New Zealand families derided as dull and boring. I am sick and tired of seeing their hard work and their effort to get ahead and do the best for their families derailed by those who rip off the system, or do not pay their fair share.”

• “We have deliberately used our position as a partner to successive governments since 2002 to introduce common sense policies that are good for middle New Zealand families, and I make no apology for that.”

• “Nor will I ever apologise for getting into government and making a difference. (Our) critics who can not look past their own myopic views around a party that can work with either major party to get things done.”

• “Why be in politics if you are not aiming to do that? Little, if anything, is achieved from the Opposition benches … We have got things done.”

• “The challenge for middle New Zealand next year is to ensure that a second term Key Government … (isn’t) dragged off to the right by zealous support partners.”

• “UnitedFuture will be there to give (middle New Zealand) a voice. To keep on track, National needs a partner that knows how to balance the chequebook, but also understands social justice and compassion – a partner with a hard head, but a warm heart.”

• “That is why UnitedFuture is looking forward to 2011 with some optimism.”

Full text of speech follows:

The National-led Government is almost at the half way point of its first term.

Its performance to date, especially that of the Prime Minister, has been strong and warmly supported by the majority of New Zealanders.

So much so that it would be a brave person indeed (or an extremely foolish one) who would at this stage predict anything other than another substantial election victory for National next year.

But while National may be odds-on to win again next year, the dark clouds are already gathering.

National’s success to date has come because the Prime Minister in particular has been extremely careful so far not to become hostage to traditional conservative policies or interest groups.

He has shown pragmatism many have welcomed, but that may be tested more thoroughly in the future as recent decisions like the proposed welfare reforms, mining on the conservation estate, and maybe even the foreshore and seabed, take hold.

Labour, on the other hand, still looks like the old government thrown out at the last election, rather than a government in waiting.

This is a perception that is unlikely to change while its old guard leadership remains in place.

The last time a major party won government with old guard leadership was Labour under Walter Nash, way back in 1957 – and it took the desperate £100 tax rebate bribe to achieve the narrowest of victories, something that could not happen under proportional representation today.

But while National looks set to win comfortably the largest representation in Parliament again next year, its support will most likely erode somewhat.

It is highly unlikely to be able to govern on its own.

That means National will be even more reliant on its support partners in the next Parliament.

And that is where the dark clouds now gathering start to look decidedly stormy.

ACT’s right wing is already becoming impatient and has shown no hesitation in trying to throw its weight around, well beyond the limits of its electoral mandate.

It has made it very clear that the Government’s reforms are too slow and too moderate for its liking.

Might I suggest that middle New Zealand does not agree with ACT on that?

Might I go further and suggest that your average New Zealander would shudder if they knew the half of ACT’s political ambitions.

Kiwis do not like walking down the road of extremism.

ACT is not a force that Kiwis would want shaping an increasingly far right second-term National-led government.

Assuming the party does not split asunder in the meantime, it can be expected to push the Douglas agenda of asset sales, reduced government spending, and service privatisation with even more vigour in the second term, as the price it will extract for supporting National.

That will test severely National’s nothing-in-the-first-three-years coyness on issues like asset sales, as ACT is unlikely to be as tolerant or pliant as it has been to date on the issue.

The signs of ACT’s current muscle-flexing are just a foretaste of things to come as the true believers and big-money backers will be insisting National implement real, core ACT policies in the second term.

Yet the moment National starts down that path, the popular press, followed eventually by the Labour Opposition, will justifiably excoriate it for returning to Richardson era politics that John Key, to date at least, has seemed so firmly set against.

And then there is the Maori Party.

The key to understanding this unlikely but genuinely strong relationship is that John Key’s invitation to join him after the last election was the first time in modern political history any major political party had invited Maori to join in government.

Labour may like to talk big about the relationship forged with Ratana in 1935, but the truth is it was always a subservient one, where Maoris’ political loyalty was quickly taken for granted and seldom reciprocated in any meaningful way.

Maori understand that.

They know that for generations they were taken for granted by Labour, which is why the strength of the bond now formed with National cannot be underestimated.

It has counted for a lot in the Government so far, and will do likewise for the remainder of this term.

While it could never say so, the Maori Party will be prepared to tolerate a watering down of its Whanau Ora plan, or some compromises over the foreshore and seabed – for now – because it is still relishing the fact it was invited to the table in the first place, and rightly so.

But that too is likely to change in a second term.

Maori are going to want much more than lip service and personal warmth on issues like devolution; the future role of the Treaty of Waitangi; and, closing the social and economic gaps between Maori and Pakeha.

Indeed, the very future of the Maori Party will depend on its making significant progress in each of these areas during the next term.

National therefore faces the unenviable possibility of being the largest party in Parliament – indeed the only party capable of forming and leading a government after the 2011 election – but with partners whose core demands are likely to tear it in completely opposite directions.

And both those directions would take it far away from its core support base and the centre ground pragmatism that has characterised the Key administration to date.

National’s strategists know this and will be very concerned about it. All of which raises the intriguing parallel of the 2002 election and with it, the question of what happens if there is a melt-down in Labour’s support, akin to that of National in 2002.

You will recall that at that time there was a popular Labour-led Government in office, facing an election it was likely to win, but where its coalition partner had imploded, and its two best options were the Greens, who were busy white-anting Labour at every turn (remember Corngate?) and New Zealand First, whose anti-immigrant xenophobia was anathema to everything the Labour Government had hitherto stood for.

Labour’s response to this impossible situation was a desperate plea to voters to just give it an outright majority – the last thing voters still mindful of the excesses of one-party government in the first past the post era were prepared to do.

In the event, a significant number of centre ground voters switched in roughly equal numbers from both National, whom they had written off as not yet ready to govern again, and Labour, whom they felt largely deserved another go, to UnitedFuture.

They did so to give Labour the moderating partner they felt it needed.

They did so, to prevent it being derailed by what they regarded as the extremes.

There are emerging signs that a similar situation may occur next year, this time with soft Labour voters both recognising their party is unlikely to win and, being not too unhappy with current government’s direction, looking for a moderating influence on National in its second term.

And, given the experience of 2002, it is a situation UnitedFuture – written off as irrelevant and politically moribund now just as we were in 2002 – is watching with some interest

But regardless of that scenario, as a party we remain committed to the cause of middle New Zealand families – the true champions of our society.

These are the people who make our community tick – who run the school boards and the sports clubs, who join the service clubs, and who genuinely care about the state of their communities.

They are not hell-bent on selling our state assets or slashing government’s social spending, nor do they want the government telling them what they can and cannot do, or providing everything for them.

They just want to get on with their lives, on a live and let live basis, knowing there is someone in government who understands and respects their concerns, and stands up for them.

That has been UnitedFuture’s role.

This party has been and is a voice for middle New Zealand families, and it is why we have endured against adversity to date.

However, I accept we have to earn afresh the trust of voters we have had in the past.

I bitterly regret that we were diverted by the fundamentalist mania of a few in 2002-2005, and although those elements have long since left us, the false impression they caused that UnitedFuture was just a bunch of religious zealots with a narrow, prescriptive moralistic agenda has lingered, to our detriment.

Today, I am drawing the line – those days are well behind us, and will not be repeated.

For the record, this is what we believe and stand for:

• Ideas and principles are more important than serving special interests.
• Promoting social advances involves all of us, not just the state.
• Participation is the key to successful communities and nations, and families are the building block of these.

These are the politics of principle and courage - not the politics of compromise and surrender as some would have it.

They are utterly consistent with our role as the protector and upholder of common sense in politics.

I am sick and tired of hearing the values and the aspirations of middle New Zealand families derided as dull and boring.

I am sick and tired of seeing their hard work and their effort to get ahead and do the best for their families derailed by those who rip off the system, or do not pay their fair share.

I think the good, honest people who do their best, day in and day out, who are long-suffering and often uncomplaining, deserve more of a look-in as far as government is concerned.

We have deliberately used our position as a partner to successive governments since 2002 to introduce common sense policies that are good for middle New Zealand families, and I make no apology for that.

Nor will I ever apologise for getting into government and making a difference.

And yet, there are those critics who can not look past their own myopic views around a party that can work with either major party to get things done.

Why be in politics if you are not aiming to do that?

Little, if anything, is achieved from the Opposition benches.

If you are going to get things done, then you need to get into a position to do it.

And we have got things done.

In 2002 it was not fashionable to talk about policies that were family friendly.

We were too politically correct for that, so Governments simply did not talk about families.

Well, UnitedFuture changed all that, and nowadays political parties of whatever hue bend over backwards to proclaim their family friendly credentials.

Some have criticised our commitment to families as meaning no more than a prescriptive view of families in the way conservative groups like Family First do.

Well, that is not UnitedFuture – in our view, families are far more dynamic, and their very attraction is their diversity.

We stand up for families for the very specific reason that strong and cohesive families, whatever their particular structure, are the key to our society’s future development, so it is only right that their voice be encouraged and heard.

Indeed, allowing families to spend more time together was one of the reasons why I pushed successfully to extend daylight saving to six months of the year, and our commitment to promoting outdoor recreation opportunities is because of our belief in enabling New Zealanders to spend more quality time together enjoying our magnificent natural environment.

These are mainstream Kiwi values we have lost a little sight of in recent years.

We developed the national medicines strategy, Medicines New Zealand, to ensure all New Zealanders are better placed to get the medicines they need when they are ill, and at a price they can afford.

Again, this is all about promoting, wellbeing, and better social cohesion.

Our ongoing efforts to reform the tax system to make it fairer, through the range of personal and business tax cuts I have been part of introducing since 2007, and including the work I am involved in with the Minister of Finance in developing the Budget 2010 tax package are about improving the lot of families across the board, and making it easier for them to play a full part in the development of our society.

Later this year, I will take that a step further by introducing legislation to allow parents with dependent children to split their incomes between them for tax purposes.

We have pushed successfully for major infrastructure developments like Transmission Gully to keep our communities more connected and closely linked.

And my efforts to promote a greater culture of giving and more philanthropy amongst New Zealanders by removing the previous limits on the level of charitable donations qualifying for a tax rebate, and introducing payroll giving, are all about recognising more strongly the important and growing role that the charitable and voluntary sector plays in our community.

What is significant is that UnitedFuture has introduced and sustained these policies under governments led by both major parties, demonstrating both philosophical consistency and a capacity to deliver.

In St Paul’s Cathedral in London there is the famous epitaph for the architect Sir Christopher Wren, “If you seek his monument, look around you.”

Well, to those who still ask what UnitedFuture stands for, let me say, “If you seek our purpose, look at our achievements.”

None of the policies I have spoken of would have been achieved had UnitedFuture not been part of government over the last eight years – nor, I suggest, will many survive if we are not there in the future.

All of them have been focused on making life better for middle New Zealand families, and restoring to them a sense of dignity that had been stripped away during the major political upheavals of the 1980s and 1990s.

But middle New Zealand’s greatest strength is also its greatest weakness – it just gets on with the job, without fuss or bother.

As a consequence, it is often wrongly overlooked as uninterested, or apathetic.

It is flexible, pragmatic and realistic – many of the virtues the Key Government has demonstrated to date.

The challenge for middle New Zealand next year is to ensure that a likely second term Key Government can retain those virtues, without being dragged off to the right by zealous support partners

UnitedFuture will be there to give those Kiwis a voice.

To keep on track, National needs a partner that knows how to balance the chequebook, but also understands social justice and compassion – a partner with a hard head, but a warm heart.

That is why UnitedFuture is looking forward to 2011 with some optimism.

ENDS

© Scoop Media