REVISITING TOMORROW 1977 – 1991 NEW ZEALAND AT THE TURNING POINT NZ Economist, April 1977 Issue * Image above: New Zealand Planning Council members and staff – First meeting on April 5 1977. Photograph from Archives New Zealand. Back row from left: Ted Thompson, Peter Wilding, R.W. Steele, Mervyn Probine, Don Brash, Rangi Mete-Kingi, Robin Irvine, Brian Picot, Ken Piddington (Director), Noel Lough. Front row from left: Claire Drake, George Gair, Sir Frank Holmes (Chair), Kerrin Vautier, Anne Delamare. About the Commission for the Future and the New Zealand Planning Council McGuinness Institute, 30 October, 2019 In 1976 the Task Force on Economic and Social Plan- ernment advisory role, was ‘concerned with long-term ning published the report New Zealand at the Turning Point. possibilities, a thirty year time frame, and with setting It highlighted New Zealand’s urgent need for direction in an agenda for public discussion and debate on possible significantly changing times, and the need to reconsider futures for New Zealand’ (Hunn, 1981, p. 2). The New how to encourage ‘widespread involvement’ in New Zea- Zealand Planning Council was ‘a focal point for consul- land’s planning processes: tation about trends, strategic issues and policy options ‘An important aim of the Task Force recommendations in New Zealand’s medium term development’, and in- is to provide for widespread involvement in the planning tended to advise ‘Government on the co-ordination of process. Up until now, participation by certain groups in planning and on choices of priorities in development’ the direction of the nation’s affairs has been much less sig- (Hunn, 1981, p. 2). nificant than is desirable, and, indeed, than is necessary to The two organisations had influential, albeit short, lifes- obtain a sufficiently wide range of opinion when planning pans, and published numerous reports on key issues for about the future. New Zealand’s future. See excerpts on page 2 and the full In this regard appointments to planning bodies and related list on page 4. They were given an ambitious mandate agencies should reflect the very great potential of women to explore how to embed long-term strategy and plan- ning in New Zealand’s public policy. The diagram below in the management of New Zealand life, as well as the *National Development Council (NDC) contribution which will come from the tangata whenua demonstrates how the New Zealand Planning Council and members of minority ethnic groups. The Task Force and Commission for the Future were envisaged to fit also believes the trade union movement should be per- into New Zealand’s ‘information flows’ (Task Force on suaded to play a much more active role in planning at all Economic and Social Planning, 1976, p. 350). levels than has been the case in the past’ (Task Force on The Commission for the Future was controversially dis- About Revisiting Tomorrow Economic and Social Planning, 1976, p. xvi). established in 1982 under the Robert Muldoon-led Third On the recommendations of this report, the Com- National Government, while the Planning Council was Just as in 1976, New Zealand has now reached a new mission for the Future and the New Zealand Planning disbanded in 1991 under the Jim Bolger-led Fourth Na- turning point. As the world faces increasing uncertain- ty, particularly when navigating issues such as climate Council were formally established under the New Zea- tional Government. See excerpts of key legislation on change, it is vital that New Zealand moves towards land Planning Act 1977. The Commission for the Fu- page 4. The legacy of both organisations was a blueprint of how foresight can be embedded into public policy. embedding foresight and long-term thinking into ro- ture, while neither a planning body nor having a gov- bust public policy. The panel discussion on 30 Octo- ber 2019 (see speakers on the right) and this newspa- Dame Silvia Cartwright Preferences Rt Hon Jim Bolger Dame Beverley Wakem GOVT per were designed with these aims in mind. Approvals Options This publication is a retrospective look into the Com- Policy Statements Issues Trends mission for the Future and the New Zealand Planning Guidelines Council and how they attempted to embed foresight into New Zealand public policy. It is made up of a combination of McGuinness Institute work and news COM FUTURE articles from the 1970s–1990s. The McGuinness Insti- tute hopes that, by looking back at the work of previ- Peter Rankin Ta- mati Kruger Amy Fletcher ous future-thinking organisations, we can provide some NZPC CONFERENCE insight and context for emerging initiatives such as the Infrastructure Commission and the proposed Climate Wednesday, 30 October 2019, 5.30 – 7.30 pm, National Change Commission. Library Wellington This panel discussion commemorates the work of the The McGuinness Institute is very grateful to have had Commission for the Future and New Zealand Planning material donated to its James Duncan Reference Li- Council. Sessions are being videoed and will be available Image left: Diagram from the Task brary from the New Zealand Planning Council and Force on Economic and Social Planning’s on the Institute’s YouTube channel later this year. Commission for the Future over the years. The James 1976 report ‘New Zealand at the Turn- A full list of references for this newspaper is avail- Duncan Reference Library is open to the public by ing Point: Report of the task force on able from the publications section of the McGuinness appointment. economic and social planning’, showing Institute website. the information flows and organisations related to New Zealand’s public policy. THE PEOPLE Page 1 DEFINING MOMENTS Future Contingencies: Nuclear Disaster (1981) McGuinness Institute, 30 October, 2019 Nuclear Disaster is the ‘The primary purpose of range of Soviet land-based fourth report in the ‘Fu- these scenarios is to put the systems)’ (p. 23). ture Contingencies’ series, effects of nuclear weapons Nuclear Disaster also notes discussing the implications into a New Zealand per- that: that nuclear disaster would spective. The attacks de- have for New Zealand. scribed are considered un- ‘the point has been reached Nuclear Disaster provides likely (but not implausible) “where the catastrophic an in-depth exploration at the present time. Over possibilities that lie latent into the possible causes the 30 year time horizon in nuclear weapons are and effects of nuclear war, adopted for this [Commis- very likely to be exploited, and the contingencies New sion for the Future] report, either by design or by ac- Zealand may need in the changes in New Zealand’s cident, by misinformation aftermath of such a crisis. strategic significance, and or miscalculation, by states improvements in delivery or by subnational groups, Nuclear Disaster notes in its by lapse from rational de- ‘Illustrative Attack Scenar- systems, may change this assessment (New Zealand cision or by unauthorized ios for New Zealand’ sec- decision’” (p. 33). tion that: is presently outside of needed to achieve long- term systemic change. He concludes that: ‘What we have to do is take the same kinds of risks that our tūpuna did when they climbed into their canoes and sailed into the un- known. This voyage into the future is unknown for us. There is strength in this venture if we have firm al- lies who are committed to Towards a Strategy for the same course’ (p. 21). New Zealand Agricul- Tilly Reedy’s view of the ture (1984) He M t puna: Some judgement that Pākehā in- ā ā sort of future she wants is stitutions and Pākehā pro- McGuinness Institute, 30 October, 2019 Māori Perspectives also included: (1979) cedures have not provided This report aims to assist a satisfactory framework ‘I would like a future where agricultural interests by McGuinness Institute, 30 October, 2019 for the achievement of people will accept me for developing an analytical Collaboratively produced Māori goals’ (p. 8). what I am – a woman, a framework as a basis for by Māori writers for the He goes on to say that Māori, a member of the strategic decisions: New Zealand Planning Ng ti Porou tribe of New Pākehā values cannot be ā Image above: Diagram showing the posited effects of detonating a one kilotonne nuclear weapon in central Auckland, taken from the 1982 report ‘Future Contingencies: 4. Council, He Mātāpuna: Some Zealand; accept me for ‘Trends in world demand Nuclear Disaster’. ‘the sole basis of planning support an optimistic view Māori Perspectives discusses and policy-making’ (p. 8). my differences as much the inequalities and hard- as my similarities; respect of the future for agricul- Future Contingencies: Natural Disaster ships of Māori in a Pāke- Robert Mahuta shares his me and what is mine, my tural exports but major hā environment through thoughts on the future, differences as much as my changes have been oc- the authors’ recount of noting that there is a clear similarities; recognise that curring in the pattern and (1982) A focus on climate change their lives and experienc- difference between the I am human with all the structure of world demand Pākehā experience and McGuinness Institute, 30 October, 2019 es. The book’s purpose is strengths and weaknesses and trade. Difficulties en- to look at how the New Māori experience, each of a human being; concede George Preddey published the report Natural Disaster having their own ‘vested countered by New Zealand in September 1981 for the Commission for the Future. Zealand Planning Council that my spiritual beliefs, my have arisen largely because can best incorporate the interests’ and values (p. 20). need for my taha M ori It is part of the Commission’s ‘Future Contingencies’ ā the agricultural sector M ori viewpoint and nar- He also suggests that the and all that that embodies, ā has not adjusted rapidly series (subsequent reports were Societal Disaster; World row the margin of inequal- two keys to success in so- cannot be separated from enough to those chang- Economic Disaster; Nuclear Disaster; and Summary Report ity, place Māoritanga at the ciety are money and edu- me.