Dunne Peter: General Debates 
Dunne Peter: General Debates 
[Volume:616;Page:11933] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I have no particular regard for Dr Nick Smith but I am very concerned at the implications of the decision handed down by the court today. One of the great virtues of New Zealand democracy has been the historic right of members of Parliament to speak fearlessly without fear of being limited in their statements when the interests of their constituents are concerned. I believe that the court judgment today has the potential to alter that situation quite radically. Whatever our political view of Dr Smith’s actions or his future I believe that it behoves all of us to consider very carefully the implications for our democracy and our freedom—the privileges that the Speaker claims on our behalf at the start of each session—in the light of today’s judgment. 
The issue I want to address in the time available to me this afternoon is one I first raised—ironically in my first speech after leaving the Labour caucus in October 1994—when I spoke to the Wellington South Rotary Club about the need for constitutional reform in New Zealand. In that speech I outlined a programme by which in my view the New Zealand constitution the Treaty of Waitangi the relationship between the two and our future could be considered. I proposed in that speech the bringing together of a public information programme to invite New Zealanders to state their views leading then to the establishment of a royal commission where the distillation of those views could be thoroughly and professionally considered and ultimately any decisions arising therefrom could be put before New Zealand voters in a referendum. 
On many occasions in the intervening 10 years I have repeated that call often in a vacuum and frequently to very unlistening audiences. In fact in the wake of last year’s debate about the Supreme Court I made a number of speeches along those lines and they fell on deaf ears for many in this House from the Prime Minister downwards. But in recent weeks I have been encouraged by the extent to which this has now proven to be an idea whose time has come. In the light of all the controversy that surrounds Dr Brash’s speech one of the clear messages coming from New Zealanders is that we do not want to continue wallowing in a tide of mutual abuse. We actually want to start to move through and deal with some of these issues that go to the core of our identity as New Zealanders and certainly reflect very strongly upon the future shape and direction of our nation. 
Therefore those calls that I have been making solely and alone for the last decade suddenly become relevant and I am absolutely delighted at the progress that that is taking. This is the right time for New Zealanders to begin to consider their constitutional future. This is the right time to consider where our instrumentalities such as the Treaty of Waitangi lie in relation to that and how they should be moved forward in today’s context. This is the right time to start to focus upon the shape of the country as we want it 10 15 or 20 years from now and start the process of making those big decisions that will lead to that. 
At the core of all these issues is in my view a frustration among contemporary New Zealanders about our sense of national identity. Massive change of an economic and social nature of the last two decades has left many people feeling uncertain about what it is to be a New Zealander today and many of us feeling that those hitherto traditional anchors in our community have been cast adrift. What we need in terms of some national cohesion some sense of direction and some sense of purpose that all of us who live in these isles ought to possess is a clear and coherent debate about our future and how we achieve it. The processes now being considered of an education programme to bring New Zealanders together in a national conversation about our future to be followed by a royal commission or its equivalent then leading ultimately perhaps to any major decisions being the subject of a national referendum are I think timely and certainly a mark of our emerging national maturity. New Zealanders are remarkably “can-do” people. We do not wallow in the mire of introspection bitterness and debate unnecessarily. We like to get on take action move to solutions and then implement them. The process that I believe we are now on the verge of embarking upon will give us that capacity. It is long overdue and very welcome.