McCully Murray: Motions — Nuclear-Free Legislation—20th Anniversary 
McCully Murray: Motions — Nuclear-Free Legislation—20th Anniversary 
[Volume:639;Page:9761] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (National—East Coast Bays) 
: 
 The National Party endorses and supports the motion moved by the honourable Minister of Defence today. The fact that both major political parties represented in this Parliament are able to support such a resolution should be and I believe will be welcomed by the vast majority of New Zealanders. We are a small country with vital interests to advance in relation to trade security and international affairs. Where possible we should speak with one voice on the international stage. I therefore welcome the fact that this motion will enjoy the overwhelming support of the House today. 
I take this opportunity to reflect not just on the wider challenges outlined by the Minister’s motion but also on the unresolved issues that remain as a consequence of the legislation that was passed 20 years ago. Few in this House will disagree with the assertion in the motion to “resolve that New Zealand should continue to work for a nuclear weapon free world;”. 
The nuclear-free legislation emerged a generation ago from New Zealanders’ concerns over the cold war nuclear arms race. It was a terrifying thought that two nuclear superpowers the United States and the former Soviet Union engaged in an arms race seemingly without end could make a frightful miscalculation with unimaginable consequences for the future of mankind. Only recently there has been some minor skirmishing around that theme in the lead-up to the recent G8 summit. But only a complete pessimist could survey the stated US-Russia strategic relations today and reach any conclusion other than that we seem to have decisively moved in the right direction. The threat of nuclear holocaust although still there has been vastly reduced over the last 15 to 20 years and we should all celebrate that. 
However the threat of nuclear weaponry has not gone away; it has simply changed its face. Indeed a rather different agenda of nuclear issues now occupies centre stage—what the pundits call “horizontal proliferation” or the acquiring of nuclear weapons and nuclear-capable delivery mechanisms by an increasing number of States. Some of these States are deeply unstable. There is therefore widespread support in this House for New Zealand’s role in promoting the non-proliferation cause. Domestically there is agreement between the two major political parties in this House that the nuclear-free legislation passed 20 years ago should be retained. Some would argue that we have come full circle to the era of largely bipartisan foreign policy of 25 years ago. Certainly there is very substantial room for us now to find a way forward that allows this country to chart its own foreign policy course and pursue its interests in trade security and defence in a manner that is bipartisan durable principled and worthy of international respect. 
It is important as the House pauses to note the passing of this legislation 20 years ago that we use this opportunity to look forward. The people of New Zealand did not elect this Parliament to wallow in the memories of the past 20 years but rather to establish a framework of relationships and understandings that will serve our national interest for the next 20 years. 
The New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone Disarmament and Arms Control Act 1987 was created 20 years ago in a somewhat controversial circumstance. Students of history have recounted in some detail the events that led to the passing of the 1987 Act. It would be fair to say that the Act however awkward or maladroit its origins now enjoys the support of the majority of New Zealanders as a central plank of our foreign policy. At the heart of this issue lies the fact that the legislation passed 20 years ago was the first significant assertion of an independent foreign policy by this country. It spelt the end of our participation in the ANZUS alliance which had until that time been the cornerstone of our defence and foreign policy approach. The 1987 legislation is often referred to as iconic. I believe that this is not just because of its specific content but because of the independence of thought and judgment that it asserts for our young country. 
My own party the National Party which had seen the ANZUS Treaty as the cornerstone of this country’s security arrangements for 50 years did not easily embrace the nuclear-free legislation. However the Bolger administration in the 1990s endorsed it and for 9 years of a National-led Government the legislation was retained. The National Party today endorses the legislation and pledges to retain it. John Key in the first days of his leadership of the National Party made that commitment clear. 
There is acceptance on both sides I believe that a cost is attached to the maintenance of the legislation. That is a simple fact of life. The presidential directive of 20 years ago that responded to New Zealand’s nuclear-free legislation with restrictions on the access of New Zealand forces to US intelligence technology and joint training opportunities remains in force today. New Zealand does not have a free-trade agreement with the United States unlike our nearest neighbour Australia which 3 years into the implementation of its free-trade agreement will provide an increasingly powerful magnet for New Zealand capital and skill. There is a cost associated with the New Zealand policy. It is a cost that New Zealanders are in the significant majority happy to bear but it is also a cost they look to their political leaders to minimise through skilful diplomacy forceful advocacy and the exercise of good judgment. 
So the retention of this legislation that is called iconic and that is symbolic of our independence of thought and judgment in international affairs is not in question. What is in question is how we might best deal with the challenges that remain as a consequence of its somewhat tortured history and how we might best re-establish the relationships especially in the vital areas of trade and security that a country with our heritage our language our history of shared sacrifice and our outlook should be able to have with those who were once our allies and who are nominally—but not quite yet in the fullest operational sense—our very very good friends. That is the unfinished business of the nuclear-free debate. 
For those reasons the National Party has sought to work with the Government to improve our relationship with the United States. Our previous leader Dr Brash Mr Groser and I were in Washington last year for the United States - New Zealand Partnership Forum along with Mr Goff and we took the opportunity to emphasise the bipartisanship of our approach. We have pledged to do what we can to achieve a free-trade agreement between this country and the United States. We have pledged to do what we can to see modification—and over time possibly more than modification—of the presidential directive of 20 years ago which restricts the capacity of New Zealand forces to train with US forces or to have access to high-level technology and intelligence. We have supported the Minister of Defence in his assertion that it is hardly right that New Zealand and US forces should work together in some of the trouble spots of the world yet be restricted in their ability to train together. 
Both of those objectives—in trade and in security—are very much in our national interest. We cannot afford to leave their fortunes to the vagaries of the domestic political cycle. New Zealanders are entitled to see that their elected representatives regardless of political allegiance will work together in these matters to serve the national interest. In the spirit of serving that national interest National members join in supporting the resolution that is before the House today.