Robson Matt: General Debates 
Robson Matt: General Debates 
[Volume:613;Page:9954] 
Hon MATT ROBSON (Deputy Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 I move  
That the House take note of miscellaneous business 
. I have just returned from Canada where I was able to speak to members of Parliament from many countries around the world on the question of nuclear disarmament. I found there was great admiration for New Zealand under the present Labour-Progressive coalition Government particularly for our economic policy our social policies and as one would expect our defence of nuclear disarmament. There were delegates and members of Parliament from many countries present there including a Republican congressman who is the chair of the bipartisan Congress committee. 
What was interesting was that those countries and their members of Parliament were interested in whether New Zealand would still be at the forefront of nuclear disarmament. I was able to tell them that that would be the case as long as there was a Labour-Progressive Coalition Government. I was able to outline to them that many parties in this Parliament—the majority of parties as I saw it—supported that position. But I stated very clearly that the National Party and ACT if they formed a Government would put that policy in danger and that their policy was to gradually take us back under the nuclear umbrella. I pointed out that other parties that are looking to go into coalition with such right-wing parties—New Zealand First and United Future—would be put on the spot as to where they stood on the nuclear question. 
As well as that I was able to point out that the present Government the Labour-Progressive Government is firmly in support of publicly owned industries and I was able to talk about the success of Kiwibank. Delegates and members of Parliament from other countries were interested in the fact that we had reversed the right-wing economic policies of the previous Government. I pointed out also that that was in danger if ACT and National with the support of United Future became the Government because those three parties have all talked about the sale of New Zealand’s public assets. The delegates had never heard of New Zealand First but I pointed out that previously New Zealand First had campaigned against the sale of publicly owned assets but then welshed on that when in 1996 it joined with the National Party in forming a Government that was against the interests of those who had voted for it. 
I also pointed out that there was a party in New Zealand that was dividing the New Zealand public which was New Zealand First with its constant attacks on immigrants and refugees. Members of Parliament found that disturbing because they were able to compare that with Pauline Hanson in Australia Le Pen in France and with other parties that use immigrants and refugees as scapegoats for their policies. 
There was a lot of interest in the fact that New Zealand had taken its stand on the Iraq war on the basis of international law. Delegates from the United States were particularly interested in that as dead Americans and many Americans with missing limbs and gruesome wounds come home and as the lies of the Bush administration come more to the fore on the question of Iraq. Delegates from the United States in particular noted that in the reconstruction of Iraq the companies that had contributed to the Bush campaign particularly companies like Bechtel and other large companies were getting the lion’s share of the untendered reconstruction contracts in Iraq. 
I was able to point out that while the United States has an unemployment rate of 6.1 percent here in New Zealand we have reached a low of 4.4 percent. I was particularly proud to be able to point to the role of the Progressive leader Jim Anderton as Minister for Economic and Regional Development in reaching that achievement for New Zealand’s economy. 
The whole purpose of delivering a world-class economy is to be able to afford to deliver the framework for a work-life balance for all our people so they can enjoy with their families the fruits of a world-class economy. At the conference the news came through that the Labour Party leader had announced at the Labour Party conference that 4 weeks’ leave was to be part of the Labour Party programme. The Progressive party which has pushed for that and first had the support of the Greens and now of the Labour Party for that knows that it has a parliamentary majority for 4 weeks’ leave. I informed the conference that we had that parliamentary majority but that it seemed to me that the conservative parties in Parliament—National ACT and United Future—would combine to vote against that policy.