KEY POINTS:
Given Labour is big on promoting human rights, the Government's seeming indifference to a state-owned New Zealand company doing business with the repressive military regime running Myanmar would appear somewhat inconsistent - at least on the face of it.
However, the Government is not being as inconsistent as National MP Murray McCully is making out.
And because it believes it is being consistent, Labour is steadfastly refusing to wear any embarrassment from the National foreign affairs spokesman's highlighting of the contract between the state-owned enterprise Kordia and Myanmar Post and Telecommunications.
McCully says the Government's relaxed attitude is at odds with both the "ministerial tantrums" that followed predominantly state-owned Air New Zealand ferrying Iraq-bound Australian troops to the Middle East and the "firm" sanctions imposed on Fiji's military rulers.
He has a point with respect to Air New Zealand. The Government's fury with the airline was driven by Labour's fear of being tainted by association with the occupation of Iraq, especially after it had ridiculed John Key for his shifting stance on the American-led invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein.
Fiji is more problematic. Exactly the same ban on granting visas applies to the "Butchers of Burma", the description McCully applies to the Myanmar regime's military leaders and their families, as it does to members of Fiji's post-coup Government.
Arguing the Fiji military's actions pale into insignificance when compared with last year's brutal and bloody crackdown by the military junta in Myanmar, McCully seems to be suggesting state-owned enterprises be banned from doing business in Myanmar, but then says he does not yet have National caucus approval to state such a view.
In hindsight, Kordia should have advised its minister of the contract - as Air New Zealand did with its troop charters.
However, it is unlikely the Government would have ordered the company to pull out of Myanmar.
For starters, New Zealand does not apply economic sanctions to Myanmar. Or Fiji for that matter. Using McCully's logic, Air New Zealand should be banned from flying tourists to Fiji.
Economic sanctions against Myanmar would have little practical impact as two-way trade between New Zealand and Myanmar is negligible - barely worth $7 million a year.
However, for more pragmatic reasons, the Government would anyway be unlikely to impose economic sanctions without the cover of United Nations say-so.
In conjunction with Australia, New Zealand has been negotiating a free trade agreement with the Asean group of countries, one of whose members is Myanmar.
Such an agreement is predicted to add an extra $4 billion to the New Zealand economy in terms of growth.
But New Zealand has to tread carefully. Asean believes "engagement" with Myanmar is the best way to influence developments in that country. Imposing economic sanctions on Myanmar could thus throw a rather large spanner into the free-trade agreement negotiations with Asean.
There is an added complication. By a quirk of timing, Myanmar is currently New Zealand's dialogue partner with Asean. In other words, Myanmar officials act as the go-between for New Zealand's dealings with Asean.
McCully is justified in asking why New Zealand has not followed Australia's example last year and imposed financial sanctions on members of the Burmese regime. The answer may be that Australia's Asean dialogue partner is not Myanmar.
The Kordia contract has prompted McCully to call for "fairness and consistency" to be the essential elements driving foreign policy.
Given he may one day be foreign minister, McCully is setting the bar at a very high level for himself.
