Dialogue: Little of value in leaders' opinions

By GARTH GEORGE

If the Herald's Common Core Debate on values proved anything, it is that we cannot look to our political leaders for guidance because, with one exception, none of them seems to know what a value is.

For the past week or so, the leaders of the six political parties have aired their views on this page and for all that five of them contributed to the core of the debate they might as well not have bothered.

What we got from them instead were the sort of speeches they would give at a gathering of party faithful or an election rally. What they said, in effect, was that they and their political parties know what's best for us and if we would only accept that what they believe and are doing (or would do) is right, then everything will be dandy.

Which blithely ignores the fact that it has been under National, Labour and their assorted minor-party hangers-on that everything has gone wrong.

Would it have been too much to ask of them to step for a moment or two out of their party-policy straitjackets and, as ordinary New Zealanders - for that is what they are and some very ordinary - share with us from their hearts how they really would like New Zealand to be?

I suppose so, for it seems that the moment anyone enters Parliament, and particularly the upper echelons thereof, they lose touch with the rest of humanity and come to see themselves as our rulers rather than our servants. Oh well, as British historian Lord Acton wrote back in 1887: "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

So let's take a look at what these hidebound political robots had to say.

Helen Clark rattled on about the "values" of opportunity, justice, fair play and security, which, of course aren't values at all but aspirations, and aspirations, furthermore, that can be achieved only if those who aspire to them have certain personal values - such as self-discipline, initiative, imagination, hard work, tolerance, patience, fair-mindedness, compassion and courage.

Said Jenny Shipley, among a lot of other things meaningless to the debate: "The next general election will be a debate about which parties will genuinely be able to allow New Zealanders to unlock the sort of future they seek for themselves and their children ... about a sense of prosperity and well-being based on a core set of values that are believable and deliverable." And these "values," she says, are opportunity, freedom and the right to choose, which they aren't - they, too, are aspirations. A willingness to take personal risks, understanding one's place in society and wisdom and discernment are the values.

And what on earth is a "sense" of prosperity? Surely prosperity is something you either have or you haven't.

Jim Anderton also talked about the "values" of opportunity and security which, he said, would make us a more vibrant country that is confident in its unique culture. But, once again, not a word about the personal values that must be in place before any of that can happen, things such as humility, a sense of self-worth, tolerance, patience, kindness and charity.

Winston Peters climbed again on his racial harmony-biculturalism-ethnic diversity-Treaty of Waitangi horse, though it is a different colour from the one he rode before the last election. He talked, and quite rightly, about the need for a shared future in which we all understand we are one country, with one set of institutions and one set of laws for everybody. But he had nothing to say about the personal values we need to make that a reality.

Jeanette Fitzsimons, bless her, rabbited on about bare feet on the beach, surfing, bush and mountains, fishing and picking mushrooms or blackberries. Her "values" were sustainability and participation, whatever they might mean.

Richard Prebble, who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing, spewed his usual sordid fascist-capitalist hogwash.

Thus do we come to my exception - Peter Dunne, leader of the one-MP United Future, the only one who really knows what values are. Hear him:

"We often lose sight of the family's role in building a cohesive society ... There is a strong sense among us that one of the things we have lost sight of in the necessary reforms of the past two decades is our sense of commitment to each other ... A society based on the primacy of the family, mixed with a recognition of social responsibility to the wider community, has a cohesion we might feel is lacking ... it also has a measure of confidence about its future and its emotional security that means it can address with a measure of confidence the [social and economic problems from which we suffer]."

What a damn shame Mr Dunne is a one-man band.

* garth_george@nzherald.co.nz