Winston Peters: Ambulance needed up top

Two strands important to New Zealand history are both in trouble.
One is capitalism. The other is the welfare state.
Recent events in the United States in particular, as in New Zealand, have shaken the foundations of capitalist belief.
The insatiable greed and corruption at the very top of American business have led the world economies to the brink of collapse and taxpayers and consumers in both countries have stumped up for unconscionable excesses.
An over-mighty few in both countries is giving capitalism a bad name, rocking confidence in this form of governance and draining it of integrity.
Meanwhile, elements of the welfare state, of which New Zealand was a leading proponent, have decomposed and a confused population no longer knows what it all means and where it will all end.
Both of the above institutions have been the victim of greed, avarice, hedonism and irresponsibility yet they confront as rivals as though they are the only two options available to us. They certainly are not.
As a result, much of the defence and criticism of the two would be comical if they were not so serious. We've moved from a time when they peacefully coexisted to one when they have become mortal enemies. How we understand and resolve this conflict is of critical importance to New Zealand and indeed the world. Capitalism must regain its human face, and welfarism its rightful dignity.
One example of how misguided the welfare state has become can be seen in the almost daily examples of childhood neglect and abuse. How is it that in God's Own with such space, resources, and a temperate climate all this is happening? It is not rocket science to work out what's wrong and what is required to put it right.
Take children, which most would call a blessing. In New Zealand today to have children, or more to the point, as many children as you like, there are only two requirements - first, consenting adults; second, both parents must be 16 years of age at conception. That's it. There is no legal requirement to be in a sound financial position; no legal requirement to provide the child with proper accommodation to ensure they are warm, safe and healthy; no legal requirement to provide the child with healthy nourishment; no requirement to provide the child with clean proper clothing; no legal requirement to submit oneself for a background check to ensure one is of sound mind and able to take care of the child.
So in theory, anyone with a drug and alcohol problem, history of violence, or a connection with gangs, and no means of supplying that child with food, shelter or any of the necessities of life can have as many children as he or she wants, whenever he or she wants.
Wait on. That's not a theory - that's a reality and it's happening every day in our country.
Most good New Zealanders are tired of lawless, disrespectful, drunk, disorderly out-of-control punks, who can't look after themselves let alone children.
Even though child abuse affects all New Zealanders regardless of race, religion or economic background the stark fact remains that we Maori feature more prominently in child-abuse statistics than any other people. And yet children are meant to be a taonga - a treasure.
And before people rush to shout "profiling", let's hear their solution. Because what we've got so far is an abomination of the welfare state where some parents get welfare and some child enters a juvenile hell. It's not profiling but protection of the young and vulnerable that a true welfare state would be concerned about.
New Zealand needs a Life Register requiring all expectant mothers to register that life with their local GP/doctor within one month of discovery.
For some, this register could be secret. The doctor would then decide the proper course of action on a case-by-case basis. For 90 per cent of cases no further action would be required and the patient would proceed with the pregnancy as is done now. The other 10 per cent would be flagged and placed in the "care at risk" category. It would form a national data base where anyone flagged is assigned a Plunket nurse to visit the expectant mother and make visual and comprehensive assessments of the situation. In most cases the Plunket nurse would continue to assist the mother throughout the gestation period to ensure the child has the best shot at life.
In the worst cases a mentor, ideally a more mature experienced woman, would be assigned to provide more hands on guidance. Such ones would be people who could empathise because they have walked in those shoes.
Freed of political considerations they would identify at-risk parents, at-risk families or family groups. They would likely feature one or more of the following: sole parenthood, teenage parenthood, low education attainment, benefit dependency, chronic alcohol and drug abuse, violence (usually by a male), blended families, cohabitation and a few others.
What it will not do:
It will not impede a legal or moral right to have children.
It will not impede a legal or moral right to have as many children as wanted.
What it will do:
It will do everything in its power to make sure that a child is brought up in a safe, caring, loving environment.
It will do everything in its power to make sure that parents have all the help needed to ensure they are in the best position to provide proper surroundings for their child.
Let's take the ambulance from the bottom of the cliff and put it back up the top where it belongs.
Next week: A response to the critics