Mapp Wayne: General Debate 
Mapp Wayne: General Debate 
[Volume:659;Page:8385] 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 Seven years in the wilderness is what that crowd opposite is facing. For the biblically inclined it will be a time of tribulation. We could ask whether Mr Goff can survive such a trial. Mr Goff already knows what that is like. He saw it in 1990 through to 1999 and I have to say National saw it from 1999 through to 2008. We know that things happen in 7 years. Leaders become desperate. They make what they believe to be epoch-making speeches. They fend off challenges—or not. They demand loyalty. They deal with whispering campaigns. 
We have all seen this in just the last week. It did not take 7 years actually. It took 1 week. I am not surprised that Mr Goff is somewhat grey-haired now; the flush of youth is truly gone from him. Let us look at the so-called nationhood speech that he made. How did it start? “New Zealand is at a cross-roads” and there was some kind of divisive approach—one pathway another pathway. So why does this speech include words like “festering wounds” “dividing New Zealanders” “set one against another” and “ ‘pork bone’ politics”? 
Mr Goff knows full well the importance of language. He knows that those words will set people against one another. He knows that people will react adversely. So it was not surprising was it that Andrew Little the president of the Labour Party said on Monday that he had personal concerns. I have to ask whether he was speaking personally or speaking for other members of his party. I notice for instance that Mr Shane Jones did not applaud his leader’s speech today. Actually he was virtually the only one who did not. 
Hon Member 
: Oh for God’s sake! 
Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: Well for God’s sake everyone else clapped but Mr Jones did not. Are they personal concerns or party concerns? 
Look at what happened. On Wednesday the headlines read like this: “Party backs Goff on Nationhood speech.” The article stated that Mr Goff said there was “unanimous support” for his leader’s speech. How can it be that on Monday Mr Little had personal concerns but on Tuesday Mr Goff had unanimous support? Well I have seen that sort of thing happen. I have been in a party that endured a little bit of time in Opposition. We had more than one leader. I have seen people going into caucus with a little bit of a whispering campaign talking to the media and going around the back saying that maybe things are not quite right but when they come out of caucus there is unanimous support. Do members know what usually happens after that? A bit of time goes on there is a bit more whispering and then what happens is a leadership spill. 
When Mr Ryall said that Mr Cunliffe had not yet conversed with Mr Goff during question time it struck a chord because I have seen that sort of thing happen in the past. I have seen people like Shane Jones not clap. We can see the divisions emerging. We can see the unhappiness that exists on that flank. We always know it do we not? Immediately after such a time what does the leader do? He comes down he uses the general debate to give a speech every party member is sitting there dutifully—actually they were looking a bit grey-faced I have to say—and they all applaud. What we do on this side and what those members have done in the past is to look for those who do not applaud because that is where the divisions lie. We look for those who do not look at each other and we can see where the divisions lie. 
How is it that in the beginning of the week there were concerns but after a few days Labour members are comfortable with the speech? We know where this sad tale ends. There will be many more years in the wilderness.