Copeland Gordon: General Debate 
Copeland Gordon: General Debate 
[Volume:642;Page:12449] 
GORDON COPELAND (Independent) 
: 
 As is now well known in this House I left United Future to start a new party that will have a constitutional commitment to Judaeo-Christian values. I thought I would like to take the opportunity afforded to me by this debate today to talk about those values and give a few examples because I get asked by so many people around the country: “What do you mean Gordon?”. 
I want to start with a list of things that flow from that tremendous values tradition. The first one is the equality of dignity of all people. It is something that is very much to the fore for those people who have seen the film  
Amazing Grace 
 and know of the wonderful work by William Wilberforce and what was known as the Clapham Sect to bring about the abolition of slavery. Why did they decide that slavery was wrong? It was because it offends against that principle of equality of dignity. 
Flowing from that and with real significance for New Zealand—and someone who was in the film as well—was the work of James Stephens later Sir James Stephens who as the British Foreign Secretary shaped British policy to bring into being the Treaty of Waitangi. When we read the Treaty of Waitangi we immediately see that it no longer treats indigenous people as inferior. It no longer suggests that indigenous people should be conquered which was what the way of the world had been right up until that time. It is obviously a treaty drawn up between two peoples on the basis of their equality of dignity. 
I would also like to mention Kate Sheppard and the tremendous work she did to extend the vote to women. As members know we gave full voting rights to women in New Zealand—the first nation in the world to do so—in 1893. Therefore I say on my international visits that we are actually the world’s oldest democracy because any system that leaves out 50 percent of the population on the basis of their sex is clearly wrong. That again is a reflection of the equality of all human beings—male female whatever nationality whatever race whatever colour. 
I move now to the Ten Commandments. Keith Holyoake when he was the Prime Minister of New Zealand always had in his House folder every time he came into this House a copy of the Ten Commandments. He told me personally that it was his reference point while he was Prime Minister to ensure that the laws being passed here did not breach those important commandments—now 5000 years old. 
I move to democracy itself. Moses said: “Choose unto yourself wise respected and understanding men and women and I will appoint them over thousands over hundreds over fifties” etc. That was the model of democracy that all these many generations later we have managed to implement in some of the nations in the world with many still to go. Many other things came out of that Jewish law: sanitation education etc. I commend to the House a book by Thomas Cahill called  
The Gifts of the Jews 
 which expands on that in great detail. I do not have time to do that today. 
Let us now move to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enacted by the United Nations with strong support from New Zealand in 1948. It is known around the world as having its origins in Judaeo-Christian values. Indeed some of the values in it such as freedom of religion and the right to change one’s religion are sometimes criticised by nations on the basis that it just reflects Judaeo-Christian values not necessarily their point of view. 
I want to move on to the churches’ great patrimony of social teaching. It rests on three foundations. The first is social justice. It was well understood by Michael Joseph Savage and I would have to say by parties on the left pretty much ever since. Michael Joseph Savage in bringing in the first welfare provision in New Zealand said simply that it was applied Christianity. It was bringing Christian values into policy and again New Zealand was a world leader in that regard and we can be very very proud of that. 
The second principle is solidarity—the solidarity of all people; the understanding that a prosperous and successful nation is simply the sum total of all the people who live in that nation. If their lives are prosperous and happy then we will have a prosperous and happy nation. One goes with the other. That I think has been very much misunderstood and misapplied since I have been in Parliament. I refer particularly to the Prostitution Reform Act which in my view is completely contrary to the whole concept and teaching of this tradition in relation to solidarity. It pretends somehow that private and personal actions do not affect society when they certainly do. 
The third one is subsidiarity—the principle that political decisions should be devolved to the lowest practical level starting with the family going on to the community then to the town the city and finally the nation in that order. As the Catholic bishops pointed out the anti-smacking bill was contrary to that principle. Then we can go on to perhaps the highest of all Christian values which is love of one’s neighbour—love of spouse love of children love of neighbourhood love of community love of city and love of nation. These are good values for the future.