Times have changed since PM John Key met Chinese President Xi Jinping in Wellington in 2014. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Times have changed since PM John Key met Chinese President Xi Jinping in Wellington in 2014. Photo / Mark Mitchell
OPINION:
The National Party's parliamentary wing has some major behind the scenes soul-searching under way on where it stands on China.
Some of this may spill out into the open at today's National Party northern regional conference in Auckland.
That's if the MPs present and the party members are notconsumed by the perennial issue of the leadership of the political wing, and suggestions put forward by a review panel which could strip the caucus of their ability to mount coups and change leaders without any consultation.
Where the debate — which is still very much at a nascent stage — is focusing, is on whether the party should move away from what one MP described to me as "the transactional approach" adopted by former National Prime Ministers Sir John Key and Bill English.
There is no suggestion that the Key/English approach lacked principle.
Rather, that some of what is said in private these days also needs to be said in public to balance the commercial focus and be more in tune with Western opinion.
Like Jacinda Ardern and Helen Clark, NZ prime ministers have privately made their protests over human rights issues plain to China's leadership.
Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta has changed that approach by speaking plainly on matters like Xinjiang and by issuing statements on Hong Kong. So too, former Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters before her.
Ardern did this herself at last year's China Business Summit and there will be anticipation about what she may say at this year's summit on Monday (Disclosure here: the author is summit co-chair).
Much of the success of the NZ-China relationship has been based on the "firsts" that New Zealand has notched with the Asian giant, such as promoting China's accession to the World Trade Organisation and its recognition as a market economy. This ahead of cementing the 2008 bilateral free trade agreement between China and New Zealand.
The people-to-people links are strong. Particularly so in Auckland, which has a growing Chinese demographic. But there is obviously now heightened sensitivity over Xinjiang and Taiwan, with some Australian Cabinet Ministers and commentators drowning in their own bellicosity as they sound the war drums.
The question of what is New Zealand's stance cannot be buried. Does New Zealand stand for an independent foreign policy, or does it bow to the jawboning of bigger powers including Australia?
National's trade spokesman Todd Muller and foreign affairs spokesman Gerry Brownlee are said to be at the heart of their caucus' soul-searching.
There is a growing preference within National for a bipartisan approach to be developed on China.
The problem that National faces is that some within their caucus, such as former leader Simon Bridges, have displayed a ruthlessly transactional approach.
The infamous recording of Bridges discussing National's donations policy still resonates.
The Chinese community wasn't particularly happy to hear his crass words which were read as implying that Chinese people could buy their way on to the party's list (also Indian people too).
Some donations made to the National Party by Chinese people are now the subject of Serious Fraud Office charges.
The infamous recording of Simon Bridges discussing National's donations policy didn't go down well with the Chinese community. Photo / File
The party chair Peter Goodfellow has also been prominent in several Chinese-led organisations. So, too, former National MP Jian Yang.
Labour has its own issues. Two current mayors — Phil Goff and Lianne Dalziel (both former Labour ministers) — have faced inquiries into whether there should have been disclosure of some Chinese donations.
This will all play out.
But while National decides what its stance should be on issues like Xinjiang, its rival for the centre-right vote has taken a clear-cut stance.
Act is asking Parliament to debate a motion declaring China's oppression of the Uighur minority an act of "genocide".
This will force both Labour and National to consider their own stances.
The Chinese embassy, perhaps anticipating this motion, yesterday, together with the Government of the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR), co-hosted an online conference and discussion on Xinjiang.
The embassy invitation to journalists said that during the online conference, the leader of the XUAR Government and representatives of the local people would show the real situation of Xinjiang and share their stories, followed by a question and answer session.
The embassy said they hoped this would provide a good opportunity for the New Zealand public to see and understand Xinjiang through their own eyes and ears.
I did not get a chance to see the online conference.
But Brownlee is on record as wanting to make sure that what is happening in Xinjiang is actually genocide before endorsing Act's move.
