Dunne Peter: Human Rights (Women in Armed Forces) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Dunne Peter: Human Rights (Women in Armed Forces) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:633;Page:5255] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 Speaking in support of the Human Rights (Women in Armed Forces) Amendment Bill on behalf of United Future I think it is somewhat sobering to recall that as recently as 13 years ago in this House we made an amendment to the Human Rights Bill to exempt women from being put into a combat role in a front-line sense. I recall the debates at that time which were the sorts of debates that dripped with concern about the frailty of women and the dangers of exposing them to dangerous fire etc. I think that most people today would be somewhat amazed to think we are actually debating in 2006 a bill to give women the right to be in the front line if they so choose. Most people would assume that that has been the case for a long time. 
When we look at our armed forces overseas at the moment—those in the Navy patrolling difficult areas of the Persian Gulf—and others that have been in peacekeeping situations where they have been exposed to danger we see that women have played an active and prominent role for many years. We now take it for granted and properly so that our armed forces are fully integrated in that sense. So this bill which I welcome is long overdue. I suspect that for many New Zealanders it recognises what they assume has been the reality for a long time. The arguments against the bill are not sustainable in any sense; the arguments in favour of the bill are compelling and I congratulate the member Lynne Pillay on bringing it forward at this juncture. 
I want to comment on some of the other speeches with regard to Nancy Wake. She is a famous New Zealander even though she left here at the age of 12. She grew up in this city. It was an era where gallantry bravery bravado and dash accompanied all of those women and they were women who were part of the Special Operations Executive which did so much extraordinary—today we would probably call it terrorist—activity in parts of France and elsewhere. Those women carried out sabotage behind-the-lines activity and the sorts of things we admire as courageous. I recall reading Peter FitzSimons’ biography of Nancy Wake and reading about her work with the Maquis and the dangers she was routinely exposed to. I think that there is a strong case for this country honouring her—not perhaps as one of its own but because of the contribution she has made. As time marches by I think the case becomes more compelling. 
It is a sadness—and we have done it a couple of times in this country—that where we have felt disconnected from someone or from an event we tend not to give formal recognition to that person or event. For example it was only on the 50th anniversary of the cessation of hostilities in Korea that this Parliament at my instigation finally moved a motion commemorating those New Zealand forces that served in what had become known as the forgotten war. Nancy Wake I suspect because she has lived so much of her life out of New Zealand has become the forgotten Kiwi. It is the pattern repeating itself. 
We do not have too many heroes in this country. We do not have enough people we can look up to as inspirational that we can afford to ignore the achievements of those who truly have been inspirational. So I think a strong case exists for Nancy Wake’s recognition. I think the irony that some members attach to this bill is perhaps drawing a bit of a long bow but the case is strong for her recognition nonetheless. 
This bill will be welcomed by those who serve in the armed forces although part of me asks why women would want to give up the exemption they have at the moment so that they can be killed alongside everyone else. But I respect that that is a somewhat flippant viewpoint—perhaps Mr Clarkson might be more likely to express it. Simply this is a bill that we will support and that we are pleased to see the member introduce.