Mapp Wayne: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Mapp Wayne: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:11892] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 National is supporting the International Finance Agreements Bill and I want to make some general points. The Labour Government has been going on and on and we have heard the vein-popping speeches which have become so ubiquitous that television commentators now refer to them as the standard modus operandi for our Minister of Trade. I have to say to Mr Goff that if he wants to become the leader of the Labour Party he has to look a little bit more authoritative and a bit more dignified than when giving these bizarre kinds of speeches. I tell him to change tack if he wants to overthrow the boss when the time comes and that could be quite soon. 
One of the interesting things we have noticed about these vein-popping speeches—where the sweat is on his brow—is that Labour is in a state of panic because National has said that actually it does make sense to have a bipartisan foreign policy. And actually to be honest for a long time there has been a bipartisan foreign policy. The Government is deeply alarmed about this and there is reason for its alarm. Labour members will have read Colin James’ articles in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 where he says John Key is not so much the competitor of Helen Clark—and of course he is—but that he is actually the successor. 
I see Mr Shane Jones smiling because he of all people knows the truth of that and he of all people knows the opportunity it provides for his personal political ambitions. He knows that it is not really a smart idea to become the leader of a party when it is going into Opposition immediately after a Prime Minister of 9 years has resigned. A little time needs to elapse and there need to be other people to take that job in the interregnum. So he can see the desirability of all that and he understands the implications of that. There is a significant and important point I am making here. When Colin James refers to Mr Key as the successor— 
Lesley Soper 
: What’s this all about? 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: This is about continuity a certain level of continuity so that other countries can get a sense of the way New Zealand approaches foreign affairs and so forth. 
Jill Pettis 
: What’s this got to do with the bill? 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: For the benefit of Ms Pettis we are talking about a bill that we will vote for and if she thought about it for a minute she might realise that actually Labour is voting for the bill National is voting for the bill and some other parties in Parliament are voting for the bill. What does that tell members? Does that not tell members that there is bipartisanship on this particular issue? Is that not the message that they are supposed to understand and get? Is that not the message that New Zealanders understand and get? That is I suppose the contemporary nature of 21st century politics when the raw ideological divisions that so beset New Zealand politics last century—the 20th century—where so much of the body politic was contested on sharp ideological lines— 
Hone Harawira 
: Hear hear! 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: That no longer applies in the 21st century. It is interesting is it not? The Maori Party member says: “Hear hear!”. The Maori Party actually wants a sharp ideological division in the 21st century as well. I say that time is passing by for those particular contests he has referred to in his various speeches. I want to make this point. South Pacific nations almost universally say: “We’re going to sign up to this bill because it assists foreign investments.” Indeed as the Minister noted it assists developing countries with foreign investment from developed countries particularly countries like New Zealand. He said: “Well the only reason they are supporting it is that it is the only deal in town.” 
Actually why is it surprising that it is the only deal in town? This is an agreement essentially sponsored by the United Nations the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. They are in fact the international institutions to which all countries sign up and they are the deal in town. There is no alternative UN. There is no alternative World Bank. There is no alternative IMF. What does the Maori Party think the alternatives are if they are not to work through the important international institutions that I and other members in the House support and have great faith in? They build stability opportunity and prosperity for New Zealand. 
So I want to put on record that National is pleased to support this bill. We see it as an important part of New Zealand playing its role in building stability in the Pacific and projecting to the outside world that as a nation we are a responsible international citizen.