Copeland Gordon: General Debates 
Copeland Gordon: General Debates 
[Volume:615;Page:11307] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 It must be admitted that Don Brash’s Orewa speech and the subsequent rise in the National Party’s popularity in the polls is sending a clear message to this Parliament. Arising from the speech itself it seems clear to me that we are probably now in agreement on two points. The first is that the historical iwi and hapu-based grievances arising from breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi need to be settled and settled quickly. That is an issue that United Future has continually voiced support for since entering Parliament in 2002. My colleague Murray Smith has successfully appealed to the Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations the Hon Margaret Wilson for more resources in that regard. Likewise having listened carefully to exchanges in the House over the last couple of weeks it seems to me that all parties now agree that access to Government funding entitlements should be unambiguously based on need rather than on race—although personally I am not yet clear where the Green Party stands on that issue. I note that Don Brash is effectively repeating the dictum made famous by Michael Joseph Savage—namely “to each according to their need”. So while some things change others tend to stay the same. 
I draw the conclusion that Dr Brash’s speech has struck a chord with New Zealanders for other reasons as well. Many of the New Zealanders I encounter feel less than confident about their place in the world. They are seeking an answer to the overarching question: what does it mean to be a New Zealander? This is a question interestingly enough over which Don Brash himself stumbled during his interview with Kim Hill. In that context I want to renew United Future’s call for a national debate on the question of a written constitution. When the Prime Minister has been asked about this I have heard her say that we already have a constitution. If that is the case let us bring a sampling of year 10 students into the House to tell us about their understanding of the New Zealand constitution. Let us then compare what they say with the response from their equivalents in Australia the USA and the Netherlands—all nations that have written constitutions. I believe that we would find the difference to be like night and day. We would find the young people from those other three nations confident about what it means to be American Dutch or Australian. They would understand their rights and privileges and the way their Government works. It would be no accident; rather it would be the result of a deliberate educational programme in their schools aimed at empowering and emancipating their citizens. In contrast New Zealand has no such programmes because we have no such constitution. 
When voices as diverse as Sir Tipene O’Regan Chris Trotter and Peter Dunne begin to say that we need a written constitution it is incumbent upon us to read the signs of the times and be prepared to move forward and move forward quickly. With a written constitution—I say to Dr Brash—perhaps year 10 students younger and older students at our schools and all the rest of us can move forward to having a new and deeper understanding of and to being confident about what it means to be a New Zealander.