Spot the difference

After reading this story in the Herald, I was struck by the similarity in the policies of the National party and the Destiny New Zealand.

Here's a quick table to summarise:

DestinyNZ	National
Opposes the Civil Union Bill because it "undermines marriage" and is destructive of "family values".	Allowed a free vote, but most MPs oppose the bill because it "undermines marriage" and is destructive of "family values".
Would require beneficiaries to work 30 hours a week in return for the benefit, and review invalid and sickness beneficiary cases to determine their justification.	Would reintroduce "work-for-the-dole". Think all beneficiaries are dope-smoking layabouts.
Would lower taxes and gut the RMA.	Would lower taxes and gut the RMA.
Would strengthen ties with traditional allies such as the United States and Australia.	Would strengthen ties with traditional allies such as the United States and Australia, and support them "without reservation".
Would hold referendums on letting nuclear-propelled ships back into New Zealand ports, and on nuclear power plants.	Would let nuclear-propelled ships back into New Zealand ports, if they thought they could get away with it. Are talking about a referendum as cover.

Don Brash isn't Brian Tamaki (or his political stand-in, Richard Lewis) by any stretch of the imagination - he's a social liberal, not a fundamentalist conservative. But many of the core policies pursued by his supposedly mainstream party are indistinguishable from those advocated by a bunch of religious wingnuts. And that is deeply, deeply worrying.