He hoped the commission’s future advice would “include principles that could inform how we could share this adaptation cost within and between generations in an equitable manner”.
“It is a challenging path for a country so small and so distant, but it will become impossible if dispassionate assessment of complex options provided by the climate commission get drowned out by simple taglines of denialism or catastrophisation, or even kick-it-down-the-roadism,” he said.
The speech was well-attended by former National MPs Nikki Wagner, Nick Smith, and Nikki Kaye. Former Prime Minister Jim Bolger was also in the House.
Muller said he was most proud of being leader of National.
“To become leader of New Zealand’s most successful political movement was humbling and exciting in equal measure, but as is well-documented, such sentiment was quickly subsumed by anguish and horror,” Muller said.
There were some veiled comments directed at his caucus colleagues for not being helpful as Muller recovered from his 2020 breakdown.
“It is important to provide suitable space for rehabilitation, including some distance from scrutiny and accountability. We do that for cancer - we should do it for poor mental health.
“In my case, that largely happened with the mainstream media, but less so with some in my party still trying to come to terms with a terrible 2020 result.
“I hope that when the occasion arises in the future, for it surely will, that empathy replaces silence and understanding, blame,” Muller said.
He also criticised the increased polarisation in politics and Labour and the notion Labour and National, the two large parties, may be unable to preserve the centre ground.
“There is anger in our community at a level I have not seen before. Boiling frustration is weaved through the personal conversations of many of our fellow New Zealanders.
“From this discontent swells greater partisanship, which is fuelling a level of political toxicity that is corrosive to our society,” Muller said.
He said the most “explicit” example of this was over the issue of Māori political and economic aspiration.
Muller said this boiled down to two opposite views: “One is that this country is being radicalised by the ‘Māori-fication’ of our society - the other is that we are very slowly, but inexorably moving to a Treaty-centred future which was imagined in 1840.”
Muller said the first point of view boiled down to “resentment that fundamental legislative changes are occurring without due consultation”, and the second was due to “intense frustration that the promise of 183 years ago continues to be denied”.
Both views existed side-by-side in Parliament, “but their world views could not be more at odds”.
“We must ask ourselves, ‘Are we standard bearers of civility and decency or amplifiers of division?’ We set an example here, and the ability to temper our language when we are fighting for closely held beliefs is not a weakness but a strength. We need to model the capacity to disagree with respect,” he said.
Labour and National had a particular responsibility here, Muller believed, to uphold the centre.
“We progress as a society when the centre holds, whilst slowly moving that centre to reflect the changing nature of our aspirations and beliefs, but if the centre collapses because the extremes are too unyielding, or either one of the main parties rapidly moves to embrace that extreme, we will put the bonds that bind our society at great peril.
“But the political centre needs to adjust as well.
“I believe that ‘one person, one vote’ is the bedrock of democracy, but bedrocks can be built on, so where there is inequity in political representation, we should be open to ensuring those voices can see a pathway for greater representation,” Muller said.
“The future is more of that, not less. Framing Maori aspiration as binary choices between radicalism and conservatism is as dangerous as rapid changes to our institutions without due diligence and consultation,” he said.
