The New Zealand Society

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31676, 11 May 1968, Page 4

The New Zealand Society

Now Zealand. By James W. Rowe and Margaret A. , Row*. Bena. 192 pp. Published a* part of the “Nations of the World” series, this is a sort of unofficial—official analysis of New Zealand society. It* purpose is descriptive, not polemical; its author* have bean instructed to explain New Zealand to the world. For this reason the book I* Of particular interest It-I* an attempt to see New Zealander* in a world context, and to convey th* impressions felt by New Zealander* about their compatriot* in a way that w» .bo intelligible Susans of ounMves to ourselves: we have taken our lack of seriousness to* seriously. Mr and Mn Bowe have no time for th* tired stereotypes—the “rugby, rosing and beer” caricature-—because they have nd' respect for foe defensive provtetialHfo fort bested genuine culture ooSnr Zealand hi* been dominated by three themes—the land; Maori and pekeha and the Welfare State. Between them, these great thread* make up the national fabric almost entirely- They are what has given New Zealand its peculiar flavour: they have provided the strengths, and weaknesses, of our society. New Zealander* are acutely aware of the land on which they live. This came about

originally because of the vast unpeopled spaces that surrounded the pioneers, and, in the South Island at least, still dominate mam Later, we discovered more fully the Intense beauty and variety of our landscape and the brilliant assortment of native birds and tree*. Always we have depended on th* land to make a living. But even this bright sky ha* a cloud. One effect of being an “uncrewded society” is that we have become a small-minded society, cut off from the mainstream of the European tradition from which we seek cultural nourishment, and unable, te a modem context, to draw more than peripheral Inspiration from Maori culture, we have tended to stagnate. One of the words Mr Rowe uses continually is “pragmatic." Few societies have committed themselves so resolutely to the dictate* of "common sense,” and, while this has obvious merits, it has accentuated the pioneer tendency to forget about broad principles and accept things as they are. In the past, New Zealand has lost many of its most able artist* and thinkers because neither new idea* nor unconventional attitudes have been tolerated. We have been practical; we have not bee® especially creative. The Welfare State, too, ha* been a mixed blessing. Mr Rowe remark* that New Zealand’s leadership in what ha* been called “social engineering” 1* perhaps our only achievement that has aroused more interest overseas than at home. In this pheomenom, he suggests, lie* the key to the national character. We admire the “little man," and sympathise with hi* difficulties; we have a strong sense of social and economic justice. Yet we are also conservative: we are much more interested in keeping going a* we are than in developing new ideal*. And so it has com* about that our social security system is now, in a world context, unremarkable.

Mr Rowe is an economist, yet he is not exaggerating when he claim* that New Zealand’s main problems over the last 20 year* have been economic problem*. Hi* prescription* seem both sensible and orthodox. We must, he urge*; diversify market* and production. While we must make a more concerted effort to develop secondary industries, priority must be given to expanding fishing and those industries, like woollen manufacturing, timber and tourism, that are directly related to the land. Over some questions, the authors are equivocal. Full employment, they admit, is an

achievement worth maintaining. Yet no mention is made, even if only to condemn of the fashionable Government view that we have had “overfull” employment New Zealand. they say, must try to be more independent in foreign affairs. Yet the strong argi> menta that have been beard in recent years for a role which is les* closely tied to the United State* ere brushed aside. Mr Rowe (who is also chairman of the Volunteer Service Abroad) think* that New Zealand’* most useful contribution in the world would be te the Pacific area. He regard* a big increase in our foreign aid a* essential. Aid, be argues, not only makes friend* but influences people not to fight each other. Mr Rowe must be asked th* question which to an economist is ana of the oldest chestnut* of all: ean we afford both gun* and butter? In the last analyris, the book’* lack of dogmatism is a virtue, for it is th* result of a perceptive and bones* scrutiny. The authors’ sympathies are clearly liberal, yet they give convincing reasons for their judgments. Our politics have, in their view, been dominated by three men: Sir George Grey, Seddon and Savage. Grey is notable chiefly for his policy towards the Maori*. In the difficult early day* of European settlement he seemed to be th* only administrator who understood and respected the Maori position. War, perhaps, was inevitable. But it was hastened by Grey’s resignation as Governor. The Liberal Government of 1896-1912 and the Labour Government of 193549 were notable not just because of their long tenure of power but because the polities they enacted are fundamental to our present experience. Reeve* and McKenzie, in Seddon’* administration, and Nash (“New Zealand’s bast Finance Minister") and Semple, under Savage, are most praised. Some assessment* are difficult to follow. Fraser, described a* “perhaps New Zealand’s only statesman,” does not, in these page* anyway, seem to deserve the honour.

Many New Zealanders win not agree with Mr and Mr* Rowe, but when a book is written by two people about all aspects of their country thin 1* inevitable. What matters is the consistency of judgment, and the coherence of opinion. In this respect there will be little dissatisfaction with th* author*. Had it been entirely predictable, it could only have been dulL Mr and Mr* Rowe are too intelligent about their country to be at all uninteresting.