 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Leader's LetterJuly 2004
Freedom & SecurityOf recent times we have seen New Zealanders depart for a commemorative service at Monte Cassino and, more recently, to commemorate D Day in Normandy. These events represent but a few of the campaigns that military people from all over the free world were involved in during Word War II. If there is one word, which describes what that war was about -it is the word "Freedom". In 1939, the world literally went to war for freedom. Coupled with freedom is security, to ensure we can all act freely. However, for security, we pay taxes. We pay to ensure we have a police force to physically protect us from criminals. We pay to ensure we have a justice system to make our society secure. We pay to make our country physically secure and ensure we have adequate border protection. In short, for freedom, we have unfortunately had to fight, and for security, we pay taxes. We always believed that freedom and security were compatible and that as a civilised, democratic society we were entitled to, and indeed, required both. Unfortunately, the world has changed. It has become a volatile place and whereas once freedom and security went hand in hand, nowadays it is becoming more an "either/or" situation. If we want freedom then it will be at the expense of (some) security. If we want security then it will result in a restriction of our freedoms. Once we had freedom of speech (within reasonable boundaries.) Now we are confined to statements that are politically correct. Once we had the freedom to go anywhere and be completely unnoticed and unknown. Now we often have to prove who we are, what we want or what we are doing. Once we could display our commitment to Christianity by having the nativity scene displayed in a shop front or a shopping mall. Now apparently, in areas, this has been stopped. Indeed, in some places "hot cross" buns have become a "No No". The prayer in Parliament has been challenged and there has been one political attempt at least to have the cross removed from the clock tower in Palmerston North. Our physical freedoms are becoming more and more restricted and our views and beliefs are being gradually curtailed. Our values are being eroded. This all represents a reduction in our freedom. In regard to personal security, the days of leaving our homes unlocked with windows wide open whilst we go on a shopping expedition have long gone. Worse still, even when we are in, we often need window locks, alarms, and warning devices. All adds to our security, but restricts our freedom enormously. As if our domestic worries are not enough, on a world scale the problems are much greater. Travelling the world might make us feel free, but in some places our individual security is severely at risk. So it is with people coming here. Many come to enjoy the fruits of hard work and enterprise in a democratic and politically free country. They come to join us, to enjoy our life-style and to commit to our society and our economic well-being. In controllable numbers, they are welcome. However, as a nation, we must prohibit people with major sicknesses, criminal background, or evil intentions from coming here. Also, those who come for mercenary advantage, or to impose and divide, must be restricted. The necessary controls, with the accompanying policing, will undoubtedly impact adversely on more of our freedom; once again, in the name of security. Will things ever improve? That is perhaps the most important question. For the short term, the answer is unclear and, regrettably, the situation is likely to get worse before it gets better. With a relatively high and increasing crime rate, a volatile world and an immigration policy that opens the door to anyone, we are exposing ourselves to major differences of life-style, attitude and culture. I am not aware of any country in the world where accommodating such differences has worked and has increased the freedom of people and reduced the need for security. It works even less in a relatively low populated country. In the Netherlands, a country which committed itself to liberalisation and multi-cultururalism on a wide scale basis, such policy was recently pronounced a failure. Our task in New Zealand First is to value the freedom that was fought for and to fight for it again, only this time through the political system. We owe it to the people who founded this country, to those who went to war and to those who died in the process. We owe more to future generations. We must pass to them a civil country, governed by democratic process, one where people can live with no fear and with minimal interference. In short, we must strive for maximum freedom with a minimum need for security. We must obtain it here and play our part in achieving it in the world. The immediate solution will undoubtedly revolve around controls, monitoring and policing and New Zealand First is working hard at having these measures implemented. The long term solution is more complex .It will not be big and large and stare us in the face. It will not involve ‘transplanting an oak tree' but will be more like ‘sowing acorns'. It will ultimately come down to implanting core values, like honesty, respect and regard for others. Maybe teaching Christian values in schools again would be a start. Peter Brown MP
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||