Barker Rick: General Debates 
Barker Rick: General Debates 
[Volume:614;Page:10592] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister for Courts) 
:  
It is very interesting to note that during this general debate in the House the Leader of the Opposition Don Brash has stayed silent. And well might he stay silent because when the National Party leaves at the end of this year to go on a summer holiday and over the barbecue look at the year of 2003 it will look in retrospect and see what it managed to achieve. 
National started out the year slumped in the polls and it is still there. It changed the leadership woke up the next morning after it had done so and said: “Oh dear what have we done? We’re still slumped in the polls.” It is now competing with New Zealand First to retain the position of being the major Opposition party. National has no hope of winning in 2005. It changed the deputy leader—that was a big mistake yet again—and the only good point to have come out of the year for National is that Bill English is finally looking as though he has a glimpse of the X factor. The dumb part of that is: the party had just dumped him as its leader. 
The National Party has been dealt another blow which came in a column in the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 as a result of the book  
New Zealand Votes: the 2002 General Election. 
 Jonathan Milne said: “The glory days are all in the past for the National Party. That is a conclusion drawn from an eight-year $1 million-plus study into how New Zealand politics has changed …” Nigel Roberts told the columnist: “I would say it means that National for the first time has to start pushing water uphill … I think we’re seeing the potential for a significant long-term change.” Mr Nigel Roberts has it exactly right. 
The change started in actual fact in the 1960s and 1970s. There was a fundamental shift in New Zealand politics. The National Party led New Zealand into war in Vietnam; the Labour Party brought the troops home. The National Party was prepared to sell New Zealanders’ bodies for sheep exports. National failed New Zealand. We have an echo of this today in the war in Iraq. National wanted New Zealand to join the United States of America in the war in Iraq; Labour said it did not because it supported internationalism and international institutions like the United Nations. The rest of New Zealand agrees with the Labour position; the National Party again finds itself on the wrong side of the political void. 
Labour supports a nuclear-free New Zealand; National embraced it but unwillingly. Again that policy started to shift in the 1960s and 1970s but National was locked into a 1950s values set. The same values held by the National Party saw it invite the Springboks to New Zealand; again Labour was opposed to that. The same set of narrow values the National Party clings to sees it being very negative towards our indigenous people the Maori of New Zealand. National wants to abolish Maori seats; Labour supports them. Labour is a positive inclusive party; National is exclusive. The National Party wants to abolish the Ministry of Women’s Affairs; Labour says that is not a good policy and we want to have all our people doing well. 
Another policy that shows the great divide in New Zealand is National’s embrace of a right-wing orthodoxy from the United States concerning work for the dole. Labour says we need to encourage people into work positively. When Labour came to power in 1999 there were 138000 people registered on the unemployment benefit. There are now 88000 people—a huge improvement. It shows the difference between a positive policy and a negative policy. The National Party has negative policies and is a punitive party; Labour supports positive policies for positive change. 
National wants to take other leaps back into the past. National led by Don Brash wants to recommence asset sales; Labour says that asset sales are finished—in fact we have built a new bank. Labour wants to progress things for working people and we are legislating for 4 weeks’ annual leave; Don Brash’s team wants to take annual leave off working people. National offers New Zealand old values. That is what this survey has found and there is a huge divide. 
Labour is looking to the future. Labour is looking to an inclusive society. Labour is looking to promote the things that make New Zealand a much better place. We want to promote our indigenous culture and say: “This is who we are as a people.” We want to be good citizens on the world stage and do the right thing by the United Nations and other institutions. 
The National Party wants to follow those values that led New Zealand down through the paths of the cold war and into Vietnam. The National Party is locked in the past and over the Christmas holidays it will be searching to discover how it can find a way to make old-fashioned 1950s policies and attitudes attractive to New Zealand—or how it can jump the divide and follow Labour into building a positive and inclusive society.