Editorial: More divisiveness likely well beyond the election

Billboards are readied as General Election shifts into gear. Photo / Michael Cunningham

EDITORIAL

An emerging theme of this election has been the caution of the two main parties in comparison to their coalition partners.

Commentary has often focused on what Labour doesn’t want to do and what National wants to revive as the two parties focus on preoccupations such as the cost of living and crime.

The Government last week began outlining its policies, starting with youth justice. The sudden resignation of Justice Minister Kiri Allan has raised fresh doubts over Labour’s chances, but we can only wait and see what impact that will have on polling.

The smaller parties have been more expansive with their plans and if the current polling trends hold might be able to demand space for their ideas after the election. Attempting to address major issues is to their credit. And whoever wins should consider any good ideas regardless where they came from.

Still, is the electorate really ready for all the changes likely to be included in the next government’s programme via coalition agreements?

The smaller parties are drawing about 25 per cent of the vote in total. The centrist portion of Labour and National’s combined 66 per cent must be sizeable. After years of the pandemic, economic stress, and an often negative election campaign are they ready for more divisiveness?

Illustration / Guy Body

It’s hard to know from the limited information available what the majority of voters are after and whether that will be the same now as in October. Polling trends offer indications but in Monday’s Spanish election, they were inaccurate - overestimating the right vote and underestimating the ruling Socialist Party.

Here, Act, the Green Party and Te Pāti Māori will have wish-lists to push depending on which side is the largest.

For supporters of the side that loses, the winners’ post-election, post-negotiations platform is likely to look rather radical, since the differences between the left and right small parties are striking. And that will probably be after a narrow win and unconvincing mandate - unless a gap in support opens up to make the margin more decisive.

At the weekend, Act added to the pile of ideas by proposing that private partnerships be used to build roading infrastructure. On some road projects, private investors and builders would do the job and charge a toll for a period, before it was returned to the government.

This adds to a busy Act agenda which includes major tax changes; more prison capacity, a reduction in the public service; a rise to the superannuation age; the return of charter schools; increased spending on teachers, defence and GPs; a new Ministry of Regulation.

NZ First, which is averaging a bit over 3 per cent, also at the weekend promised inflation-adjusted income tax brackets and tax incentives. The party would exempt basic foods from GST.

The Greens and Te Pāti Māori agree on the need for tax reform. The Green Party wants a wealth tax, an initial tax-free threshold, and a guaranteed income that would transform the benefits system. It has accused Act of being a threat to goals on climate change.

A feature of this campaign has been widespread populist rhetoric and pitches for attention-grabbing headlines on things like potholes and te reo signs. NZ First’s slogan is “Take our country back”.

How will that tone - which seems likely to stir up party members but might turn off voters generally - influence voting in the end? There are still a lot of unknowns.