Agreement
on values is easy if we stick to broad concepts that are open to interpretation.
When we get into specifics we quickly hit areas of conflict.
Interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi as a founding document, or the extent to which we must protect the environment at the expense of jobs and economic growth are two areas where the even current Government has divergent views.
A nation's values are also fluid. Just as we would hope to learn and grow wiser as individuals, so it is with society.
Fifty years ago most New Zealanders considered this to be a fair and just nation - even as we were jailing homosexuals and hitting our children.
We once allowed lawful discrimination against women and banned the use of Māori in schools.
New Zealand's steadfast belief in egalitarianism was for a long time used as a cloak for conformity. It repressed eccentricity - and with it excellence and success.
We dubbed that the "tall-poppy syndrome" and have in the past few decades sought to leave it behind.
It is true that as the world has opened up to greater levels of migration the complexity around national identity and cultural values has increased.
How far does tolerance stretch in a multi-cultural society?
Issues such as religious freedom have to be balanced with the freedom of all citizens to live without fear of persecution and discrimination.
NZ First is right that all immigrants must respect our laws.
But New Zealand already has laws which enshrine human rights. It has a hate crimes clause which includes sexual orientation and gender identity, for example.
NZ First's proposal implies that the current laws are not working - without providing any evidence for this.
"Immigrants must agree to respect New Zealand's values and to live a life that demonstrates that they respect New Zealand values," it says.
Debates about a nation's values and what it means to be a New Zealander should be embraced.
But if and when we do enshrine values in law - as we did the anti-smacking bill (which NZ First wants to repeal) - then we should do so on a case by case basis.
Each issue needs careful, democratic consideration and the bar should be high.
As we watch the US struggle through an era of intense and often bitter cultural conflict we should be looking for more measured paths through the moral maze.
A grab-bag of legislated national values would have implications not just for immigrants but for all citizens, who would also effectively be bound by them.
The proposal raises the risk of limiting individuality and freedom of expression in a way which would, ironically, run counter to its own spirit.
NZ First is calling for government, and politicians, to play a greater role in defining what it means to be a kiwi and how we should live our lives.
Without evidence that current laws are not working, this is a dangerous path to go down.
