Dunne Peter: Obituaries — Rt Hon David Russell Lange ONZ CH John Finlay Luxton QSO Hon John Howard Falloon CNZM Rod David Donald 
Dunne Peter: Obituaries — Rt Hon David Russell Lange ONZ CH John Finlay Luxton QSO Hon John Howard Falloon CNZM Rod David Donald 
[Volume:628;Page:54] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I rise to support the motions that the Prime Minister has moved in respect of our four departed colleagues. I want to make some comments about each of them because I have had the privilege of serving alongside each of them as a member of this House. I too acknowledge the presence of the Hon John Luxton. 
When I came to Parliament in 1984 as a very new back-bencher I was seated in a far corner of the House about a row or two behind Jack who was entering his final term. Although we were from different parties and there was a gulf of years between us to those new Labour back-benchers in that corner of the House during that term of Parliament Jack quickly became a father figure. He advised us almost constantly on the Standing Orders and on what was going on and we were struck by his gentlemanly courteous informed and considerate approach. I discovered another side to him as we moved around some of the meetings around Parliament of various issue-based groups. I found that Jack was a frequent and very vigorous attender at many of those organisations often completely beyond the ken one might have thought of a member of the National Party of that time. He was a man who has been acknowledged already for his gentlemanliness his courtesy and his wisdom. That was certainly the experience I had of him and I want to place on record my tribute to him and his family. 
The Hon John Falloon was another in the same category. He was a few years younger admittedly but very much of the same school. Over the years he served in this House he distinguished himself in many many ways and he continued that tradition of service in the years after he left. The tragic circumstances of his death also I think came as a great shock to those of us who knew him and our thoughts are very much with his family at this time as well. 
Much has been said already about David Lange and in the weeks since his death there has been a reconstructionist view I guess of his time in politics and of his leadership. It has been a very favourable and overdue reconstruction because at the time David left this place the prevailing view was that he had walked away from it because it got too difficult and that really we had been shown the frailty of a man whose reputation was built on a tremendous oratorical power an ability with words and humour and not much else. In fact as Dr Brash has acknowledged David was a man with a very deep view about New Zealand its place in the world—not just in terms of the independence of our foreign policy but more in terms of our identity as a nation our growth and our future prospects—and an earnestness and a compassion to do more to make New Zealand one of the more progressive nations of the world. I believe that will be the mark of his prime ministership and it will certainly be the mark of his Government of which I was privileged to be a junior member. 
Often I think the true test of leadership is when one can inspire a nation and a people to do things well beyond their capacity or their comprehension. David Lange with his rare ability to inspire enthuse infuriate and delight us—often all in the course of one speech—epitomised that capacity. I want to tell the House of one incident that sticks long in my memory and that made me feel extraordinarily proud to be a New Zealander. 
I was a very junior back-bench member of Parliament on my way home to this country from the United States as David was on his way through to do the Oxford Union debate. Our paths coincided in Los Angeles at the recently demolished Ambassador Hotel in the ballroom where Robert Kennedy had delivered his speech just before he was assassinated. The occasion was a luncheon put on by a New Zealand - American friendship group attended by several hundred prominent but very sceptical American political diplomatic and business leaders. The back wall of the dining room on this occasion was lined with television cameras all curious to see this man who had dared challenge American political defence orthodoxy and who was in danger of bringing Western civilisation to its knees. David Lange gave his speech which was politely but sceptically received. There followed a lengthy period of questions and answers again politely but sceptically received. 
Finally a very large gentleman—in fact of a build similar to his with a Mark Sainsbury - type moustache to match; the only thing missing was a cigar to be chomped—who was representing one of the channels got up and said in a big drawling voice: “Prime Minister you’re on your way to Oxford to debate the morality of nuclear weapons with Jerry Falwell. He will have the Bible in one hand and a cross in the other and will be arguing in favour of nuclear weapons. What can you possibly say in response to him?”. David Lange flashed that smile and said: “I will tell him that to err is human but that I am prepared to forgive him.” and he sat down to the most spontaneous standing ovation you could ever imagine. 
I have to say that that was a day that this New Zealander for one—and there were many others in the audience as well—felt extraordinarily proud of the way our leader had put our country on the international map. That evening the local television channels led their news with Prime Minister Lange being in town. It was not “Prime Minister Lange from New Zealand that country down by Australia” but “Prime Minister Lange” in the same way that our bulletins today talk of President Bush or Prime Minister Blair. 
That I believe was David Lange’s lasting contribution to New Zealand. He lifted us above ourselves. He made us proud of some tenets that we held dear and he gave us credibility and respect in the international environment. I hope his family who will be suffering his loss take some consolation from the tremendous awe that that man is still held in for the leadership he gave a country that was embittered divided and very introverted at the time. He gave us a glimpse of what we might be; I believe that is his lasting legacy. 
My colleague Gordon Copeland will speak in more detail shortly about Rod Donald but I want to make these few comments. Rod and I—as is no secret—shared many political differences but what will not be known to many members of this House is that there were a number of issues we collaborated on. For many years and as recently as earlier this year we were a regular roadshow at Victoria University with the two of us doing a presentation on electoral reform and the changes it introduced into this country from our own particular perspectives. They were always great occasions. I never cease to marvel at the way Rod clutched to him the report of the royal commission which was by this time so tattered and dog-eared because it had been so well-thumbed that he did not need to actually refer to the pages. He could remember those by heart but he would always hold this tatty volume in his hand and he was invariably right. 
His facts were extraordinary; his recall was great. He was humorous he was cheery and he was as others have said enthusiastic. His untimely death—I must say to the  
Dominion Post 
 which said that he was from a different generation of other political leaders that I am only 3 years older than he was—is an awful reminder to every single one of us about the transitory nature of our role here. It reminds us of the fact that there are other things in life to worry about—our families our friends and our communities—and the thing that none of us will ever say on our deathbed if we get that privilege is: “My goodness I did not work hard enough in life. I should have worked harder.” We would all say it the other way around. To Rod’s family and his friends who will be mourning the loss of a father a partner and just someone who was very good company I extend my very deepest sympathy. 
It is a rare occasion in the House when we come together to honour people’s contribution and their memory. It is one of those things that brings us together. It is perhaps a lesson about the things that really matter and the fact that all of the other divisions and arguments we have are transitory even if they might be fun and they might be pursued with vigour. But ultimately it is an occasion like this that makes us take stock and remember who we all are where our responsibilities lie and what the future may hold for us.