Valedictory Statements

Oscar Wilde apparently once claimed that he never travelled without his diary. This was so that he would always have something sensational to read on the train. This was not exactly what I had in mind when I reread my maiden statement the other day, but I was keen to compare what I said then against what I have learnt from all of you while experiencing the privilege of more than two terms of service in this House. On 1 August 2006 I made my affirmation of allegiance in English and in Tahitian. This was intended as a tribute to both of my parents. Like so many who have helped build our society, they were immigrants to New Zealand, both of them. I want to repeat that tribute now, and I acknowledge my family members who are here this evening: my father, Charles, my sister, Fleur, and her husband, Michiel, and my Auntie Annie, who has travelled from Tahiti. I am sure that if such things were possible, my late mother and grandmother would be keeping a close eye on proceedings as well.

I chaired the Regulations Review Committee of this Parliament from late 2008 until 9 a.m. this morning. More recently I have been shadow Attorney-General and a member of the executive, with Therese Arseneau, of the Australasian Study of Parliament Group—the ASPG. These roles have all required me to observe at close hand the daily operation of the machinery of our Government, and much works well. Today, for example, the House disallows, on my motion, transport regulations that clearly contain matters more suitable for legislation. They lapse because a disallowance motion moved by me as a member of the Regulations Review Committee will not have been brought on for debate within 21 sitting days. Remarkably, this will be the first time since 1986 that the relevant Standing Order has been successfully used in this way. Although I have not always seen eye to eye with the Leader of the House, I acknowledge and congratulate him on allowing the system to work in this way, as it was intended, on this occasion.

Of course, there is always room for improvement. Elsewhere in this building Geoffrey Palmer and Jim Bolger are about to give papers at a seminar hosted by the Australasian Study of Parliament Group, and that seminar will look forward to how Parliament might be made to work better over the next 30 years. Geoffrey has shown me his paper in advance. I agree with much of what it says, and in fact I would go further in many respects. I think it is time for an entrenched Bill of Rights and a constitution, including provisions that accord the Treaty of Waitangi appropriate status. Parliamentary procedure badly needs further reform, including rationalising the number of select committees that members are required to sit on, and increasing the powers of those select committees. Our public watchdogs need proper powers and resources. The judicial branch’s independence needs to be formalised and safeguarded, while ensuring that the courts remain responsive to public need. Preparation for the inevitable transition to a republic needs to begin. Opportunities offered by technology to open government and eliminate red tape should be maximised. I am very proud, as the outgoing Labour justice sector spokesperson, to see that Labour policy now reflects many of these positions.

But it is not only Government institutions that need strengthening. Democracy requires a free, well-resourced, unbiased fourth estate. Journalists working in much of our undercapitalised, foreign-owned media are under constant professional pressure. This comes from many quarters, including the constant need to sell newspapers and air time, and also the need to compete with instantly available online sources. In the case of the two better-known right-wing blogs, those online sources are proxies for the present Government, and much copy is supplied to them directly out of Ministers’ offices at the taxpayer’s expense. A general dumbing down, but, more important, a loss of independence have been the inevitable results. For those of us who want to read and listen to unbiased domestic news and analysis, or even for those of us who do not really care whether John and Jacinda are still New Zealand’s sexiest politicians, there remain a diminishing number of options. The quality of reporting and analysis offered by the Public Broadcasting Service, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and the BBC, as well as the effect that they have on the standards of other media, are simply not available here. It is high time for the re-establishment of a strong, independent, well-resourced, multimedia public broadcaster in New Zealand.

Since 2008 I have chaired the New Zealand - European Union Parliamentary Friendship Group. The New Zealand State, founded on the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, situated in the South Pacific, is not European, and we must become more integrated in our own Asia-Pacific region. We have known this for years. We also know that the Americas and, increasingly, Africa will offer important trading and cultural exchange opportunities to us. But the EU remains the world’s largest economy. Like us, it has an emissions trading scheme on its statute book. We share similar economic, social, cultural, and environmental values. We profess a shared belief in a government of laws. The EU offers models for better regional institutions in the Pacific to promote development and good governance. We need, in order to secure our nation’s future prosperity, to pursue greater engagement with the rest of the world. We all know this. But as we do that, it would be folly to ignore Europe, or, worse, simply to take it for granted.

I want to particularly mention three members’ bills with which I have had some involvement. In the last Parliament Carol Beaumont adopted my bill to control loan sharks, the Credit Reforms (Responsible Lending) Bill. Sadly, the combined votes of National and ACT saw that bill defeated. Since then the recession has bitten deeper, and many more thousands of lives have been blighted by the activities of loan sharks and the repossession agents who inevitably follow in their wake. New South Wales has just passed legislation in very similar terms to my original bill. There is overwhelming public demand for Parliament to act on this issue, and I wish Carol well in completing that task when she takes my seat in 12 days’ time. On the subject of members’ bills, I want to acknowledge Lianne Dalziel, for whom I drafted a bill, the Crimes (Provocation Repeal) Amendment Bill, based on the work of the Law Commission to abolish the partial defence of provocation. That doctrine gave licence for the murder of defenceless victims, too many of them gay men. It needed to be scrubbed from the statute book, and it was finally repealed in 2009, after the defence sought to invoke it in the Weatherston trial. The Government’s method of repeal was the substantial adoption of Lianne Dalziel’s bill. As MPs over the years, including my friends Jonathan Hunt, Fran Wilde, Katherine Rich, and Lynne Pillay, have demonstrated, members’ bills matter—more so in this MMP Parliament.

Of course, I have to mention another important member’s bill standing before the House in the name of Louisa Wall, which comes back for debate next month, the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill. Moana Mackey and I sat on the meetings of the Government Administration Committee that heard evidence on that bill. I was incredibly impressed both by the overwhelming support that was expressed for the measure, and by the respectful way that submitters were heard by the committee. Members supported the bill by an overwhelming majority when it was read a first time last year. I sincerely hope that will occur again at the second and subsequent readings. David and I had been partners for 13 years when we had the privilege of getting married in January 2008—we just had to go to Canada to do it. Our laws should no longer deny all New Zealanders the fundamental human right to marry and found a family here.

I want to acknowledge the fantastic support I have had from so many people during my time as an MP. Particular thanks go to the staff who have worked in my office: Gina, Sue, Juliana, Geoff, Chris, and Ritchie. Many of those who volunteered to help on my campaigns in Ōhariu are here this evening as well. I thank Diane, Caroline, Glen, Janine, Kaine, Dolly, Wendy, Alastair, and everyone else who lent a hand. Together we reduced an incumbent’s majority from over 8,000 to just over 1,000, we collected more signatures on the petition opposing asset sales than any other non - Labour-held electorate, and we have organised the local party again.

I have been a member of the Labour Party since 1985. In my view, it remains the greatest force for meaningful social change in this country. It continues to offer energy, ideas, and talent from its ranks that would adorn any Cabinet. I want to express publicly now two hopes that I have confided to David Shearer in private. First, I sincerely wish that he will be Prime Minister in a Labour-led Government at the end of next year. I regret that I will not be his Attorney-General, and I appreciate his statement that he shares that regret. Secondly, it is unproductive to keep trying to locate and exclude the supposed enemy within. Instead, in order to avoid history repeating, it is time for an honest, open, and overdue assessment of why the 2011 campaign produced Labour’s worst ever electoral result. Those responsible for it should make dignified exits, and all the undoubted talent and diversity of the caucus should be included in the shadow Cabinet. To put it another way, in Gough Whitlam’s immortal words, the party must have both its wings to fly.

Next month I begin work full-time for the United Nations in New York. I think I have some idea of what to expect. I served for 2 years on the UN Global Commission on HIV and the Law, and I have undertaken some follow-up work to that exercise, including travelling with Jackie Blue and Jan Logie to Timor-Leste last year to observe the work of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria there. It seems that there is much truth in Dag Hammarskjöld’s observation that the UN was not intended to send humanity to heaven, but merely to prevent humanity from sending itself to hell.

As far back as the 1940s Peter Fraser recognised the UN’s importance, and devoted much of his time and energy to its early design. Now, of course, its principal operational programme is headed by another former Labour Prime Minister of New Zealand, Helen Clark. I am very proud to follow in the tradition of New Zealanders who have supported the extraordinary work of the UN over the years in peacekeeping and peacemaking, its promotion of democracy and development, and its protection of human rights and the environment. My role will be to give advice on democracy and good governance. Without all that I have learnt from you all in the last 6½ years as a member of this Parliament, I would not be equipped to perform that role.

In 2006 I ended my maiden statement with thanks to all who had supported me to become an MP, and expressed the hope that they would find my service in this place worthy of that support. I conclude this speech, and my service in this House, by repeating that hope, as well as expressing my thanks and best wishes to you all.

Sitting suspended from 5.58 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.