The ever-present Winston Peters. Photo / George Heard
The ever-present Winston Peters. Photo / George Heard
OPINION
With all the conflict and negativity of this election campaign, we shouldn’t forget the extent to which Kiwis still agree on a few simple things - family, sport, BBQs and the beach.
It’s important to celebrate our shared values and the things that unite us as a nation.
Agreat example of the broad political consensus that still exists in this country, is the enduring unpopularity of New Zealand First and its leader Winston Peters.
Statistically speaking, Peters unites Kiwis like almost no one else.
Bear in mind how remarkably rare it is for people to agree completely on anything. A Ministry for the Environment survey in 2022 found that 82 per cent of New Zealanders feel that it is very or extremely important to improve the quality of our water.
Who on earth opposes that?
But on current polling, around 94 per cent of Kiwi voters agree that Winston Peters and NZ First should not be back in government.
The results of an online survey for Consumer Magazine in 2021 found that 81 per cent of Kiwis agreed supermarket prices in New Zealand were too high.
It’s incredible to think that nearly 20 per cent of people felt prices were either too low or just about right.
Yet even at the height of Peters’ popularity in 1996, more than 86 per cent of Kiwis were united in their lack of support for NZ First.
Peters dislikes having his style compared to populist US politician Donald Trump, which is fair enough. Peters might be populist but he isn’t actually popular.
Trump won the US Presidency in 2016 and still polls in territory that could see him win it again.
For the past 30 years, despite having the strongest personal brand in New Zealand politics, Peters has never come close to winning an election.
He is often referred to as a king-maker, which tends to overshadow the fact that he has never been, and never will be, king.
That degree of political consensus around Peters should be heartening. But, unfortunately, we’ve got a political system that seems almost purpose-built for him.
MMP isn’t necessarily a terrible idea but Peters has found the glitch in it, which he continues to cash in on as if it was a dodgy pokie machine down the back of a quiet RSA.
Around 3 or 4 per cent of New Zealanders seem to be consistently sold on his 1950s school-master schtick and the “pull your socks up” policies he promotes.
To get beyond that, Peters has proved a master of tapping into disaffected voters every three years, whoever and wherever they might be.
He’s had to dig deep this time, but it’s not a coincidence that he was the only mainstream politician who made the effort to meet the angry protesters camped at the Beehive last year.
Once you’ve got the goodwill of that crowd there is no amount of negative media that can hurt you. Getting shown up on national television - as Peters was by Jack Tame on Q&A - just becomes an opportunity to reinforce conspiracies about elitists and their biased obsessions (with detail and facts usually).
How is it that we can once again be looking at the prospect of an election night that leaves us all waiting on Winston?
The short answer, this year at least, is that the guy who looks odds on to be the next Prime Minister has made a terrible tactical blunder.
For some reason, Christopher Luxon never felt confident enough in his chances to directly rule Peters out.
Now, in what is fast becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, it is likely he’ll have to call him next Sunday morning.
National Party leader Christopher Luxon has made a tactical blunder. Photo / Jason Oxenham
The dawning reality of how badly Peters could undermine Luxon as he attempts to lead the kind of stable government the economy needs has sparked some last-minute panic in the National Party ranks. Sir John Key has been rolled out to implore disaffected centre-right voters to fall into line.
The answer to the bigger question of how we deal with a political system that keeps throwing the balance of power to this one unpopular political figure is more complex.
Hoping that Peters might quietly retire has proved futile. He looks more than capable of sticking around until the technology allows us all to upload our brains to the internet. So it is safest to assume that some version of Peters is built into the system for the foreseeable future.
I think the most workable solution would be to drop the threshold required for parties to enter parliament.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, more parties might actually add stability.
With a 2 per cent threshold we’d see the likes of The Opportunities Party come into play. It might also open the door for the kind of blue-green (teal) parties that have emerged in Australia.
But reforming the system won’t save us this year. And neither of course will any number of disapproving media articles. To Peters and his supporters this is just more dunder-headed bull-pucky and fustilarian whiffle.
That doesn’t bother me professionally. Peters was, is and always will be, good copy for a journalist.
But it is a great shame for the overwhelming majority of Kiwi voters who’ll once again cast their votes for candidates who are not Winston Peters.
