The Richardson philosophy

Press, 18 February 1986, Page 13

The Richardson philosophy

For the first time, Miss Richardson has set out what her basic theories are.! She has a two-part agenda for National: she wants acceptance of her philosophic direction, and then she wants it implemented with such flexibility as is needed.

“The 1984 election result was a clear signal ;that the voters will not accept centralisim,” she says. “The voters gave all the political parties a mandate to work to change the status quo.” This realisation crosses party lines, both here and overseas, and she says that irrespective of political party, “market means” are the way to go if you want the best performance. Miss Richardson wants her caucus colleagues to acknowledge that not only are “market means” correct in principle but that pragmatic analysis shows them to be the best means too — a happy coincidence of principle and pragmatism.

So — how can National move from regulatory centralism to market liberalism? What is the philosophy? Ruth Richardson says New Zealand needs external security as the guarantee of its freedom. This in turn, will enable the exercise of individual freedoms, the exercise of responsibility, the enjoyment of dignity, and personal motivation. It will give freedom of choice in financial affairs, industrial unionism, education and health. These freedoms of choice will give individuals personal sovereignty, economic independence and selfsufficiency, which she sees as the keys to better performance by New Zealand.

Her rationale for this is not the economic imperative so much as the behavioural imperative —

the paramount need for the individual to enjoy freedom and take the responsibility that runs with that freedom. She believes the influence of the State is pernicious and debilitates the individual.

“For generations now the Welfare State has sent the wrong signals to people," Miss Richardson says. “People learn dependence from the cradle to the grave, and have their dependence rewarded.” She wants this turned around. She says people need to be educated to be independent and rewarded for it. Her idea is to put everyone on notice that this is the sort of society she wants a National Government to work towards. The State would retain a residual responsibility for welfare, and those who are dependent for no fault of their own. A rump Welfare State will be kept as a last port of call. But if people are to blame for their own dependence they will not be able to look to the State. Miss Richardson describes this as “having mattresses at the bottom of the cliff rather than five-star hotels.”

Reversing dependence on State aid will rescue people who over generations have surrendered their independence to the State. This learned behaviour will have to be unlearned. “It is a trade-off,” she says,” “because if individuals take more responsibility for themselves then the State will need to tax less to fund the Welfare State, and not interfere so much in their lives.”

Examples of what this would mean, include:-

• If a family breadwinner died suddenly then the dependants

would become eligible for State help, because it would . not be their fault they had lost their independence. • Old age is predictable, so if elderly people are poor and needy it is probably because they have been improvident when income earners and so made no provision for themselves. If people have spent their money on the T.A.B. or in the pub rather then preparing for their old age, then they should not be allowed to claim dependence on the State. This cannot be done overnight, but will need a long lead time of due notice. •No unemployment benefit would be paid to anyone less that 20 years old. There would be State payment for education and training, as now, for people out of school. People would not be paid for doing nothing. • No-one would get the unemployment benefit who would not travel anywhere in the country to do work they were equipped to do. The only function of the State might be to pay them to get there. Thus, an unemployed computer programmer who would not take an available labouring job would not get the benefit, but an unemployed labourer would get the benefit if the only job available was in computer programming. ® Any girl under 16 who had a baby would be required- to have it adopted out; any girl aged 16 to 18 could keep her baby if she could establish that she had financial support. In neither case would solo mothers be paid a benefit to keep their baby. Ms Richardson says it is contrary to the interests of society to pay children to have children.

Miss Richardson says the present system is immoral. She

recounts the case of the engineering; student she knows -who got married and, because his wife earns more than $5OOO a year, lost his bursary of $4OOO a year. They share a flat with an unmarried couple in similar circumstances who have decided not to get married so as not to forfeit the bursary.. She asks where the immorality lies in this case — with the second couple or with the system? She acknowledges that a transitional period will be needed to introduce her radically different system — maybe a decade, or even two decades. People would need to be on notice.

Three areas of policy will be central to equipping individuals to adjust — education health and the workplace. The State will have an active role in all three.

The consequences will be national security, the promotion of individual security, and the creation of a climate for economic security, Miss Richardson says.

Key features to be sought in economic security are investment and productivity, and the price stability that will flow from the application of these policies — such as low inflation, stable interest rates in its wake, and an exchange rate that reflects the worth of trade flows. Trade will centre on export-led growth based on agriculture, manufacturing and technology. These consequences would in turn reinforce individual freedoms, responsibility and dignity, she says. New Zealand would become a country grounded in the ideals of self-sufficiency, sustainability, small government, economic independence and individual choice.