Peters Winston: Debate on Iraq 
Peters Winston: Debate on Iraq 
[Volume:607;Page:4113] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 There is no doubt that the world would be a safer place without Saddam Hussein. New Zealand First takes the position that Iraq poses a serious security threat in the Middle East and beyond. That threat has not dissipated since the 1991 Gulf War when the Iraqi forces were thrown back from their invasion of Kuwait. After that war the United Nations made it clear to Saddam Hussein in resolutions that he had to get rid of his weapons of mass destruction. Those resolutions stand on their own despite others that may have followed them. Saddam Hussein is still thumbing his nose at the United Nations 12 years later and successfully dividing countries that were traditional allies. This evil despot and dictator must take great comfort from that. He must take great pleasure in watching former NATO allies tearing each other apart in public. 
We understand the urgency felt by the Americans. We understand also the frustration in the positions taken by the British and the Australians—our closest allies. But today our responsibility is to focus on the interests of New Zealand and our position. For most of this year the Prime Minister has acknowledged the inevitability of war in Iraq. For reasons best known to her she has declined to share any of the information she has been receiving with the elected representatives of this country. Parliament’s Security and Intelligence Committee has not met this year to discuss the situation in the Middle East. In fact we have had one meeting which was on 17 December 2002 since the election on 27 July 2002. Surely that is one of the most important committees of this House and the security and safety of the New Zealand people is one of the most important functions of any Government or parliamentarian. But the Government with all the State resources at its disposal cannot organise a meeting of the Security and Intelligence Committee. 
One has to ask why that is. Is it because we are almost defenceless back home against a terrorist attack? We already have suspected terrorists in New Zealand. They have come here shredded their passports gone through the immigration system—such as it is—and applied to become refugees or asylum seekers. New Zealanders have no idea how many such people there are of that ilk in this country and neither does the Government. We do not know what the authorities are doing to track them down except that we know there is one at least at leisure in Paremoremo prison. He has been there for months and New Zealanders must be scratching their heads in utter amazement over why the Government did not put him on a plane back to the place whence he came. 
New Zealand First places the security and safety of New Zealanders first uppermost and foremost. We want the Security and Intelligence Committee to discuss measures to keep our borders safe being on the brink of war as we are. We want to know what measures are in place to keep terrorists out and what checks are being carried out within the country for those who have already arrived as every other Western nation has been doing for the last year. 
This House until this day has been utterly ignored by the Prime Minister. While the world hovers on the brink of war the Prime Minister plays petty politics on  
Morning Report 
 on the issue of who is to blame for a debate not yet having been held. That is outrageous and it belies the seriousness of the concern and the despair that some people have expressed in this House. It is unparalleled in Western society for a Parliament to be having on the edge of war its first debate on the issue. It is plainly wrong. We have New Zealand service people close to the imminent war zone but we have been denied any chance to look at the true facts of the situation because the Prime Minister is keeping those all to herself. 
The real question then is what does the Prime Minister know that she has not told the rest of us? Is she privy to the same information that the British and Australian Prime Ministers are sharing; if not why not? Why are we not being given all the information that the Prime Minister must be receiving on a daily basis? 
We in New Zealand First understand and support the objective of disarming Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction. We believe that the Iraqi leader is playing his own dangerous and demented game. He has proved time and time again that he is the master of brinkmanship—a form of brinkmanship historically dependent upon the weakness of those people around him. But what we cannot support and we have made it clear from day one is a unilateral decision by one group of countries to invade another for the terrible precedent that it might set. It is not a precedent of course that the so-called dictator and despot could take upon himself for he is not invading democratic countries with human rights—it is quite the converse. 
But in some respects the United Nations is now like a toothless tiger; it has a history of shame in the Balkans and in Africa where millions of people have been slaughtered but at least it has tried to prevent war and helped to bring peace where there has been conflict. The real question is what have those countries that have expressed so much concern about a unilateral decision done about arriving at collective action? 
New Zealand subscribes to the United Nations and historically we have always answered its call for help. War should not happen simply because the United States has amassed hundreds of thousands of troops in the Middle East ready to invade Iraq. War should be only a last resort when all diplomacy has failed and Iraq has gone past the point of no return to the comfort in terms of evidence and proof of enough countries in the world. But unfortunately we in this Parliament and in this country do not have the information to know whether that has yet happened and we in New Zealand First regret that. If the Prime Minister has access to it and she knows about it for some reason why has she not chosen to share it with the rest of us? 
We disagree with those parties that cynically advocate support for the United States based on reasons of trade or any other similar international benefits. War should not be about that. But we also oppose those groups that would wave a white flag and feathers and inevitably side as they always do with the enemies of the West. Those people are of great comfort to despots like Saddam Hussein. We in New Zealand First are prepared to support an American-led invasion to rid the world of this evil regime for humanitarian reasons proven a thousand times over but only if it is decreed by the United Nations and only to prevent further conflict and ill to mankind. To be consistent that is the only position this country with our history and our present circumstances can take.