Speeches 

It is a distinct privilege and pleasure to be here, and I feel at home with you because, like many of you, I serve as a presiding officer in the New Zealand Parliament; and in the Cook Islands, I also feel very much at home because of our special relationship. For I am in my 20th year as the representative of the multicultural and creatively richest electorate in New Zealand, which includes Otara, home of many Pacific Island groups in New Zealand. My constituents include representatives of all the stars that twinkle on the Cook Islands flag, and many others. My brother-in-law, Maurice Tillotson, served as your national soccer coach for some years, and I have frequently sought Rarotonga as a place of refreshment and renewal.

We have a proud and active community of Cook Island kiwis, who have a precious commodity which researchers in the West call ‘social capital’. I see it as I move about the churches and schools in Manukau – their contribution is extra specially valuable. I trust that we can convince them that Parliament is the place where we have time and inclination to listen to them rather than being too busy, mired in calculation and mudslinging.

You and I daily strive to ensure delivery of democracy; we do that by sustaining a culture of engagement of ideas that puts aside private interest and personalities, and we call on the character of MPs to summon the character of our lands. We are leaders by example in Parliaments supposed to serve – hopefully growing, with our community, a sense of parliamentary service. I say by example – for if we do not lead by example we have only got threats or bribes left, or silly sideshows of the divide or dismay and rule type. In many jurisdictions there is a rising sense of a rent between the leaders (us) and the led (them). This is expressed in low turnouts at elections, trivialisation of vital issues and the turning away from service by capable people who are abhorred by the public face of parliamentary culture. We must work as Presiding Officers to ensure the reinstatement of integrity in service.

As the world shrinks and we live in closer communities, the need for honesty and integrity in politics is greater than it has ever been. That is why I want to demonstrate to you that I am here to listen and learn from you in the vital area of nourishing and sustaining respect for and participation in politics. I share the concern of parliamentary colleagues from throughout the world – when we have such huge problems facing humanity – species loss, global warming, trade round collapse, malnutrition, and the list goes on. We must solicit the widest sense of wisdom, but the public are turned off from politics.

I also stand here to share with you some of my experience as the Chairman of the International Council of the organisation Parliamentarians for Global Action, an NGO based in New York with 1300 members worldwide, representing more than 100 democracies.

For many, Rarotonga is touted as an escape, but for each of us there is the urgent awareness of a real challenge; a universal decline in the sovereign power of democracy. Some governments are prepared to wage war in the name of spreading democracy – but to do so when democracy is crumbling at home ends up spreading more manure than a spirit of service. In the US Harvard researchers led by Joseph Nye (1997) have collated a series of studies under the heading ‘Why People Don’t Trust Government’.

Last year’s Italian election was reported as a more-than-robust round of scurrilous character assassination rather than a sober tour of the pressing issues. Israel too held an election amidst one of the most vital set of circumstances confronting civilisation and there was a poor turnout.

The current UK Conservative leader David Cameron placed improvement in parliamentary behaviour at the core of his contribution to his adoring followers as he nailed his standards to the Westminster mast. He said (12/2005) “We need to change, and we will change, the way we behave. I’m fed up with the Punch and Judy politics of Westminster, the name-calling, backbiting, point-scoring, finger-pointing”. Fed up is an apt description for the feedback I get about parliamentary trends. The mausoleum for the first New Zealand Labour Prime Minster (Michael Joseph Savage) extols that ‘there is no fame to rise above, the crowning honour of a people’s love’. Modern politicians do not need to be loved but we do at least need to be respected. Sadly, research shows a decline in affection for and participation in democratic processes throughout the western world. In 2005, ‘did not vote’ finished third behind the Labour and National parties in the New Zealand election - in 2002 that vote finished second. The minor parties were well behind.

Throughout my parliamentary service I have been concerned about the public perception of our profession. I have petitioned my colleagues, drafted a Code of Ethics, and discussed it with my PGA colleagues who held a parliamentary forum on Ethics & Accountability in the US Senate in June 2004. We concluded that transparency, ethics and accountability are pre-conditions of good governance.

For me, ethics and values are the most important issues facing the survival and development of democracy this century. I am inspired by William Wilberforce, who showed that you can make a difference and alter events around you if you do not give up, and are persistent in advancing an ideal that you believe in. In his case it was the abolition of the slave trade, and he also led a charge for decency and respect for others. He believed that all people of authority should set an example, and that they should match conduct to words. I liked that determination and those ideals. As such, I’m driven by a desire to improve the standing of our House among the people we are supposed to serve.

When I embarked upon this quest for the restoration of manners, for integrity and accountability, I was reminded of the Speech from the Throne delivered when the newly-elected government led by Helen Clark took office in 1999 - “My government recognises that there is deep public concern with a number of aspects of the operations of our political system in recent years… (we will) restore public confidence in the political integrity of Parliament and the electoral process.”

Robert Kennedy’s most memorable statement – the words inscribed on his tomb – also inspired me. “Each time a man stands for an ideal or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing over from a million different centres of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.”

As with any novel idea, initially some of my colleagues were doubtful, suggesting that all of my colleagues would become my enemies (not just those sitting on the other side of the House). Then they were chastened by a referendum that cried out for a significant reduction in the number of MPs (120 down to 99). My Prime Minster declared in the clarion Speech from the Throne upon our election (1999) that we would achieve an improved relationship. My work is one step on that journey of a million miles.

The question has been asked of me by New Zealand television presenter Willie Jackson, “Do you think a Code of Ethics is needed, and why?” My response was “Yes”, and the reasons two-fold: first, that there were no specific guidelines about how members should conduct themselves from an ethical point of view; and second, “trust” – politicians worldwide are the least trusted profession. The following are just some of the comments which appear in a recent poll published by Readers Digest in July 2005:

- In the list of most trusted professions, politicians were number 30 of 30, behind even real estate agents and car salesmen;

- Respondents voted Parliament the second least trusted Government body in New Zealand today;

- There is no doubt that politicians have demeaned the House of Representatives in the public mind, particularly among home-owners, nearly half of whom have no belief in the institution.

These are disturbing comments and figures. Such beliefs and perceptions may, or may not, be based on misunderstandings, but they still matter.

One of the more prevalent trends of this decade, social theorists tell us, is towards a restatement and confirmation of the moral basis of our society; a call for a new sense of morality and a return to old standards of common sense and decency. Communities throughout the world are concerned that business and government are conducted with the highest integrity. As members we reflect the society that elects us; however, leadership brings with it an imperative for conduct of a higher standard, an example for others to follow.

Experience has taught me that there is a strong public demand for a clear code of principles to govern the conduct of Members of Parliament. A public statement of values and acceptable standards of behaviour would assist Members to understand their obligations, and provide a public standard against which an individual’s conduct may be measured.

Hence the pursuit for a Code of Ethics. The Code proposed for New Zealand – and I have many good friends working with me on this - is deliberately modest, declaratory rather than mandatory. There is no evidence in New Zealand of the sort of corruption that has plagued other parliaments from time to time, or that is endemic in some other countries. The principles on which the Code is based include integrity and accountability, for it is accepted that these qualities are prerequisites to maintaining confidence and trust in politicians.

By beginning simply and not sanctimoniously, we recognise that most members are hard-working and sincere. The future of the parliamentary system is in our hands, and we want a document that those hands can mould in harmony with the community.

We are all keenly interested in sharing our understanding of our professional home – Parliament - the home where we seek to summon the common sense, concerns and commitments of our communities. Community literally means ‘together we serve’. Parliament should be the pinnacle of public service where we ensure the frank and free flow of critical analysis of the values, visions, ideas and actions of our people.

Recently I made my third attempt through submissions to Parliament’s Standing Orders Committee to persuade my colleagues to adopt a Code. It was my third strike. I am hopeful that I might have more success on this occasion - time will tell - but if not, some of my supporters have suggested I consider legislation by way of a Private Member’s Bill.

We are not highly thought of collectively, although we may be individually. This is because, collectively, we are seen by the community to have abandoned the standards that attract respect. It would take only our recognition that there is a real political advantage in integrity, openness, and transparency to bring about the necessary change.

I believe New Zealand has an obligation in the Pacific, and indeed world-wide, to lead with good governance and democracy in such things as transparency and accountability. By adopting a Code of Ethics and following it according to its spirit and purpose, we can maintain our standing as a model democracy.

With regard to my goal of raising respect for both Parliament and our New Zealand democracy by improving the performance of Parliament, as that recently-acquired Kiwi saying goes, it may not happen overnight, but I am convinced it will happen. Now I wish to hear from you – representatives of a sacred space in the South Pacific – for whom global issues like global warming will have huge impact. Kia orana.

• OUR MPs | 
• FEATURES | 
• LATEST NEWS | 
• SPEECHES | 
• PORTFOLIOS | 
• POLICY | 
• MULTIMEDIA | 
• SEARCH | 
• CONTACT US