What to do with Australia? Easy: go out into the world together. Actually, that is not easy at all.
First, what is the world? Fifty years ago it was the north Atlantic rim. That was where the money was, where the power was and where “we” came from.
Now the “world” for Australasia is the western Pacific. That is where, increasingly, the money is and will be and where the power increasingly is and will be.
Trust has a special meaning in politics. Remember that when the electioneering starts and you are invited to trust candidates, leaders and parties.
This became important in the 1990s because trust in the main parties, in politicians generally and in the institutions of our democracy fell away.
In part this reflects a worldwide trend in our sorts of democracies. As we have grown to expect more from our governments since social security, state pensions and state-funded education and health systems became universal successive generations have become more picky.
Yesterday was a time to reflect — on a defeat and a journey.
It is a journey in parallel with Australia, though Australians seldom see it that way and we have for long periods travelled wide apart from each other. And it has been a journey of many hesitations, only now gaining firm direction.
Gallipoli punctured the imperial triumphalism of a young, ultra-loyal colony. It scythed through the raw settlements. Worse followed on the western front.
If the government gets involved in business it is taking risks. That’s the nature of business. But should a government take risks with taxpayer money?
ACT’s Rodney Hide is adamant: it shouldn’t. Business is business and government is not business. Hide says the best contribution would be lower taxes, lighter regulation and less red tape.
Go to a National party hui these days and you’re in John Tamihere’s constant company. He’s a star of the show. Ooh-la-la.
JT is the man who told it like it is inside the supposedly unified and competent Labour-led government. Vote National.
JT is the man who forced Helen Clark to give him yet another chance (after yet another and yet another and yet another). Vote National for a firm leader. Take a bow, Georgina te Heuheu and Katherine Rich.
John Tamihere had promise — bucketloads of it. Don Brash has loads of promise, too. Tamihere trashed his promise. Will Brash live up to his?
A year ago Tamihere had the political world at his feet, with his macho patter, charisma and ambition. A fortnight ago he was certain to return to the cabinet post-election. But it takes a big boy to live up to his sort of self-image.
Tucked away in the Reserve Bank’s March monetary policy statement was a graph which should worry our grasshopper society. The future it paints might be the trigger that turns us back from borrowers to savers.
The graph showed average household wealth rising from 3.5 times household income in 2000 to 4.5 times in 2004.
The big screen behind Helen Clark on Saturday at Labour’s pre-election “congress” proclaimed: “Taking New Zealand ahead”. But where to?
For an answer, we might turn to Clark’s “vision”. In both her speeches she intoned this golden word. But what is her “vision”? Does she really have one?
Six years ago the Labour party promised 95% of people would pay no more income tax. Some promise.
Labour’s ploy was to reassure the great majority of taxpayers, in the face of its promise to tax income over $60,000 (the “rich”) an additional 6, that it would not be an old-fashioned tax-and-spend government.
The end of a transition — and another just beginning? There will be a large absence and a brooding presence at Labour’s pre-election congress this coming weekend.
The absence will be Jonathan Hunt. For 40 years he has been a feature and a fixture, jovial and kindly to all, the very soul of loyalty to the social democratic cause under the strain of tough economics and tougher politics. He has been one of Helen Clark’s innermost confidants.