We begin with the core assumptions that individual freedoms, private property and free market economies are superior to state ownership and central planning. That is not just one man's superficial opinion, but is proven: We have seen Eastern Europe with state ownership and central planning and an attempt at economic equality, collapse or crumble before our very eyes.

I want, therefore, to share with you a principle of sound public policy. We can differ on exactly how any one of them may apply to a given issue at any given time, but the principles themselves, I believe, are profound truths. If we adhere to these principles, we will be much stronger, much freer, more prosperous and a far better governed people.

Principle One: Individual freedoms, equality of opportunity, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of association and the rule of law.

If a people enjoy individual freedoms and equality of opportunity, they are better able to release their creative energies which contribute to the overall development of the community.

Freedom of speech is the oxygen of democracy. Free expression provides the search for spiritual, intellectual and civic truths, and these truths can best be realised in an environment that allows all ideas to present themselves for debate. A society that deprives individuals of these freedoms does an injustice to the individuals' evaluation of the truth. Such societies often suppress not only political and cultural ideas, but scientific ones that conflict with official doctrine. Clearly, in a society where some topics are off limits, truth must take a tortured path to the light.

Free expression is necessary for democratic self-governance. If elections are to have any meaning, the people need to be able to exchange ideas, and to circulate information related to public affairs. The Press, in particular, must be free to investigate and criticise the government and to check abuses of state power, since even where governments are accepting of free expression they, is some instances, cannot be expected to use their powers to favour any interests but their own.

Free expression works as a kind of social safety valve and thus works better than suppression in maintaining social order. This view of free expression values tolerance both for its own sake and for its ability to channel dissent into peaceful social change.

The enabling conditions for free expression are, therefore, an independent judiciary, a pluralistic society, favourable economic conditions, together with peace, stability and tolerance.

Principle Two: Free people are not equal and equal people are not free.

On the face of it, this might seem as a contradictory and confusing statement. I should, therefore, clarify the kind of "equality" to which I refer in this statement. I am not referring to the equality before the law or equality of opportunity. They are important foundations of any democratic society though we often fall somewhat short of them; but I doubt that anyone would disagree with these worthy concepts.

No, "the equality" to which I refer is all about income and material wealth. What we earn and acquire in the marketplace of commerce, work, and exchange - I am speaking of economic equality. Let us take this principle and break it into two halves.

Free people are not equal. When people are free to be themselves, to be masters of their own destinies, to apply themselves in an effort to improve their well-being and that of their families, the result is the market place will not be an equality of outcomes. People will earn different levels of income and they will achieve different levels.

We are different in terms of our talents. Some have more than others or more marketable talents.

We are different in terms of our industriousness and our willingness to work. Some people work harder, longer and smarter than others. This makes for vast differences in how others value what we do and in how much they are willing to pay for it.

We are different also in terms of our savings. I would argue that if the Premier could some how snap her fingers to remove all of the political and social barriers and equalise us all in terms of income and wealth today; we would be unequal by this time tomorrow because some of us would spend it. These are a few of the reasons, but by no means the only reasons why free people are simply not going to be equal.

Equal people are not free is the second half of this principle - show me a people anywhere on the planet who are indeed equal economically and I will show you a very unfree people.

The only way in which you could have even the remotest chance of equalising income and wealth across society is to employ brutal force. You would have to give orders that would go like this: Don't excel, don't work harder or smarter than the next guy. Don't save more wisely than anyone else. Don't be there first with a new product. Don't provide a good or service that people might want more than anything your competitor is offering. What is the message of this principle? Don't get hung up on differences in income when they result from people being themselves. If they result from artificial and social barriers, then get rid of those barriers.

I firmly believe, of course, in wealth creation - that is necessary if we are going to do all the things that we ought to be doing for our society, especially for the casualties of our success. But we must not say it with any sense of gloating or superiority.

We have to create conditions in our society in which people grow in respect, tolerance and spiritual values which are as equally important as material success because there is no automatic connection between wealth creation and a happy society.