Ovation for Mr McLay

Press, 2 August 1983, Page 2

Ovation for Mr McLay

By KARREN BEANLAND The Minister of Justice, Mr McLay, won a standing ovation at the National Party Conference in Dunedin yesterday when he spoke about the party’s philosophy and its implementation. He was the only one of eight Ministers who addressed the conference over the week-end on the subject of building new New Zealand to receive a standing ovation. He told the conference that the National Party’s basic philosophy was not at issue. Its themes were commitment to political liberty and democracy, belief in free competitive enterprise, upholding personal freedom and the rights of the individual, and commitment to the rule of law. New Zealanders were among the strongest supporters of individual enter-

prise, so they identified with the party’s philosophy. “New Zealanders expect their Government to lay down some ground rules for a society, a framework within which a free enterprise system can work, but they don’t really want it to go much further,” Mr McLay said. “Some people have a lingering suspicion that capitalism is another name for ‘greed’ and is therefore immoral. Capitalism means having the courage to get out and take a risk. Socialists don’t take risks with their own money. They do it with yours.” The National Party had to show that private enterprise was more competitive, more likely to be profitable and more likely to be successful and employ more people. “In the last five years we have removed a lot of un-

necessary controls and regulations and more must go” National was the only party that talked about, and did something about, economic freedom. The private sector was important in other areas as well. During the Springbok tour, two freedoms had been at issue — the freedom of a sports group to associate with whomever it chose and the freedom of others to demonstrate peacefully against that decision. “It was stark evidence of the differences between Labour and National. Labour emphasised collective rights and responsibilities and National chose individual rights and responsibilities,” he said. “We gave people the choice. Labour would have denied that choice.” New Zealand was now faced with a similar issue in voluntary unionism.