Colin James speech at NZ Herald lunch 29 November 2002
Michael Cullen presents a coherent and well-honed explanation of the government’s overall economic policy. He is the most lucid Finance Minister of the eight I have dealt with. He convincingly draws links between fiscal and monetary settings, balanced regulatory settings, facilitative interventions, restoration of the infrastructure and development of consensus. Accept Michael’s premises and it is difficult to challenge the logic.
At the heart of this government is a paradox: it has set a bold target and a strategy that calls for boldness but it makes a virtue of “incremental” policy, the very antithesis of boldness.
The target is 4 per cent a year growth in gross domestic product (GDP). That is better put as 2.5 per cent a year growth in GDP per capita, which takes out the impact of migration and workforce changes.
Where’s this global warming Pete Hodgson goes on about? Those of us shivering in points south want action.
Instead we get glum sermonising reminiscent of 1950s presbyterian preachers, whose joyless mien Pete’s long face and furrowed brow uncannily resemble.
Actually, Pete is not joyless. A twinkle of his ready smile and you know you are not in the company of one of those deeply sad people, the apocalyptic environmentalists.
Susan Baragwanath organises the education of teenage mothers seeking a second chance. Christine Fernyhough organises special education for gifted children from low-income homes.
Both are insiders, members of the wealth and power elite. When they arm-wrestle obdurate, rule-bound bureaucrats, they stand a fair chance of winning. Their networks can mobilise considerable human and financial resources. Beware such people. They do good.
Speech by Colin James to the United Future conference, 16 November 2002
This time last week I was listening to a disorganised ramble by a former colleague of Peter Dunne’s. Pauline Gardiner was urging on New Zealand First delegates zero tolerance of drugs. United Future would agree.
Pauline was one of the six serving MPs, four from National and two from Labour, who joined Peter in the United party in 1995. Peter served in the National cabinet in 1996. He had been a Labour party minister in 1990. Richard Prebble, a colleague of Peter’s in that 1990 cabinet, defeated Pauline for the Wellington Central seat in 1996. He was leading ACT. Graeme Lee, a former National MP, led the Christian Democrats in that election. For the 1999 election the Christian Democrats renamed themselves Future New Zealand, which was the name Peter gave the party he formed in 1994 before later joining United. Peter was most put out about that usurpation of his party’s name.
Not enough babies. Maybe it’s time to emigrate? Nearly half of us want no more Asian immigrants, say Insight pollsters, and the trend of dislike is steeply up. Winston Peters is on to a winner.
Certainly, he and his senior MPs made a meal of it at the weekend at his party’s convention, swamping attempts by some to extend New Zealand First’s appeal beyond the immigration ghetto.
Globalisation is good for you — but it needs a lot of improvement. So says journalist Philippe Legrain in a readable new book which could usefully top every executive’s, politician’s and protester’s list to take to the beach this summer.
Open World: The Truth about Globalisation is a definition, defence and dissection of the phenomenon that has stirred passions for and against across the globe.
Over the next two weekends two important smaller parties will remind National activists how badly their party has bled.
New Zealand First will celebrate its rise from the dead this weekend. The next weekend United Future will meet in search of a party.
New Zealand First represents a strand of opinion — on immigration — that is at odds with the majority.
How does a party go about assembling a solid voting base when the old “social cleavage” no longer decides loyalties? By values.
Elections used to be fought on the pocket book, a galaxy of economic issues to do with incomes, taxes and benefits. And those issues still are important. But now, as Australian Labor party frontbencher Mark Latham points out, “political culture” plays a large part.
Right now, if she hadn’t jumped the gun midwinter, Helen Clark might be heading towards, or have just recently obtained, the majority she once coveted, or a result close to it.
A mid-October or early November election would have conferred a powerful benefit on Labour compared with the July one. Genetic modification would not bitten so hard.