Mapp Wayne: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Mapp Wayne: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3364] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (NZ National—North Shore) 
: 
 One word sums up this Government and that is “incongruous” because what I heard earlier today was Lianne Dalziel—not the Minister of Immigration but apparently the “Minister of Rainfall”—saying that due to the wonders of the Labour Government water flows every day of the week in rivers in the South Island. How extraordinary! I am surprised that we have not had a call from the Pope saying: “Give that woman a sainthood!” That is the kind of claim one would expect to hear. There has to be a warning to the Government because those who go for those kinds of claims are quickly due for a fall. The reality is that every single thing the Government has claimed was built on the hard work of the 1990s. One does not get growth of 3.9 percent or good employment or good economic conditions unless one has the foundations right. The Labour Government did not put those foundations in place. 
I want to talk about the most pressing foreign policy issue facing not just this country but the world today. New Zealand is not simply a bystander. Our Prime Minister is not simply an academic commentator as she would often have us think. One day recently she predicted that the likelihood of war was about 52 percent. Extraordinarily the next day it had dropped to 50 percent; a few days later it had gone up to 70 percent; and in her speech later this week she said that war was likely to occur. The role of a Prime Minister is not that of a dispassionate commentator. What we expect from a Prime Minister is leadership and the reason is that the United States Britain Australia and most European countries are actively engaged in assembling forces. There is a broad coalition of the willing and we are not just talking about a narrow group of English-speaking countries. We can also include Italy Spain Portugal and the Netherlands; and from Eastern Europe Poland the Czech Republic Estonia Latvia Hungary Slovenia and Slovakia. Every one of those countries is saying that Iraq is a threat to world peace and disarmament is needed and needed now. Yet today when the Prime Minister was asked directly whether she supported a second resolution her answer was “No”. So here is a person—a leader of the country—who says that she believes in multilateralism but when the rubber hits the road she ducks for cover. That is not leadership.  
The reality is that as a nation we are turning our back on traditional allies. The outcome of that is to give the dictators free rein. Who honestly believes that Iraq can be trusted? Even the Prime Minister herself admitted that the statement made by Colin Powell strongly suggested—and I quote from the statement—“a pattern of deception and concealment of Iraq’s weapons programmes.” Based on that fact does it seem credible that Iraq will stop doing that—that it will suddenly have a change of heart and that everything will be revealed? In the words of Colin Powell: “You would only need one or two people to weapon inspect because this country would suddenly become one of honesty.”  
The reality is that Iraq is a brutal dictatorship in which lies deceit and manipulation are of second nature to its leaders. Anything one hears from an Iraqi commentator can be dismissed for was it is—a lie. That is the reality and that is what the Government needs to understand. What Iraq is doing now is simply buying time. The question the Government must honestly and directly confront is this: how long can the international community really be expected to maintain the scale of inspection that would be required to guarantee Iraq’s long-term disarmament? Look at the pattern. We have had 12 years of continuous defiance of UN resolutions and we seeing exactly the same pattern all over again. There is no doubt that the end of Iraq’s dictatorship will solve that problem.  
That leads us to ask a serious question of the Government which is what should New Zealand be doing? After all the Government is charged with that responsibility. National’s position is clear: we should be supporting our friends. That means supporting Australia. It means supporting Britain. It means supporting the United States and it means supporting them in the United Nations for a second resolution. That is how the authority of the Security Council itself is maintained. The alternative approach will actually damage the very multilateralism that the Government applauds. Trying to be all things to all people is the road to ruin and it will cost this country dearly.  
In her speech yesterday the Prime Minister said that Iraq was in breach of Resolution 1441. Members should remember that that resolution was supposed to be a final warning. As the Australian Prime Minister said yesterday: “Mate the game’s up!” But the Prime Minister is unwilling to do anything to enforce that resolution. The Prime Minister said this afternoon that she would not even support a second resolution in the United Nations yet she immediately went on to say that should there be a second resolution the New Zealand Government would enforce it. But enforcing it means that she will leave the difficult work to others and people have to ask questions about that.  
That pattern of dissembling by the Prime Minister is shown in the decision last November to deploy New Zealand’s entire Navy—not just one or two ships but all of our combat vessels—to the Gulf along with an Orion and a Hercules. That is most of our Air Force. Yet the Prime Minister says that has nothing to do with Iraq! Remember that that decision was made just 2 days after Resolution 1441 so it is simply not believable for her to say that it had nothing to do with Iraq. This House and this country know the reality.  
What we want from the Government is honesty and directness so that when we deploy forces—as we obviously have done—we admit that it will make a difference in enforcing the resolution. At the very minimum it will enable the release of other countries’ forces. Whether the Prime Minister likes it or not we are part of the coalition of the willing. We on this side of the House require honesty and integrity of a Government about that—no dissembling but a clear statement of principle. Do we support UN resolutions; will we support Britain Australia and the United States in the Security Council or will we take the path of appeasement? That is the real choice facing the country.