Editorial: Anderton creates a law unto himself

How gullible does the Deputy Prime Minister take us to be? He has abandoned the party for which he was elected and yet contrived to avoid the consequences laid out in his Government's own Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act 2001.

Under that sorry legislation, an MP who wishes to leave his party is obliged to inform the Speaker in writing and give up his seat. Failing that, the party leader may take steps to unseat a member who has broken ranks with the party under which he was elected.

Mr Anderton would have us accept that the law does not apply to his departure from the Alliance because he and the party will pretend it has not happened until Parliament is dissolved for the election due in a little over six months. Then, he and most of his MPs will seek re-election as Labour's little helpers and the rest of the party can campaign as a more distinctive party of the left.

It is easy to imagine the scorn Mr Anderton would pour upon this contrivance if his political opponents resorted to it. Indeed, he was among the many expressing contempt when National's junior coalition partner split and half its MPs stayed to prop up the last Government until the election.

The law to punish "party hopping" was the result. To the Alliance, it was the Alamein Kopu Act, in memory of her defection from the party that put her into Parliament. Her supposed offence looks mild now beside the actions of the party's founder. Mr Anderton has just shown how his own law may be flouted - so long as you are the party leader.

The Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act was based on the contention that MPs who quit a party upset the proportional representation of parties in Parliament as determined by votes at the previous election. Both sides in the Alliance dispute believe they are keeping faith with their voters of 1999 by maintaining the pretence of a single party for the rest of the term. It is not in the interests of either side to destabilise the Government and force an early election. Only Mr Anderton and two or three supporters would be likely to survive it.

The rest of the Alliance have six months in which to establish an independent case for survival. They will espouse policies well to the left of Labour and the Anderton party, whatever it may be called. But they will have to do so without undermining the coalition of which they will remain nominally a part.

Their likely leader, Laila Harre, may find it impossible to remain in the cabinet and present alternative policies with the force the party will require. The Alliance's task is all the more urgent because it will be competing with the Greens to Labour's left. Both parties are likely to espouse more protection and financial regulation, less trade liberalisation, higher public spending, more tax. And Green parties have a certain fashionable lustre that traditional trade union socialism lacks.

From now until Parliament rises for the election the Greens will continue to have the advantage of independence. While they give their votes to the coalition on most issues, they are not part of it. That position has left them polling above the 5 per cent threshold for MMP survival while the Alliance languishes well below it.

The differences between Mr Anderton and his party began over their tactical response to the polls. The party president wanted the Alliance caucus to distinguish itself more clearly; Mr Anderton argued voters would ultimately reward the party for not rocking the boat. In the latest Herald-DigiPoll survey we put the issue to a sample of the public. There were 25.2 per cent who agreed that the party has not asserted its own policies strongly enough. About the same number (24.3 per cent) agreed with the opposite proposition, the Alliance has had too much power within the Government.

The largest proportion, 36.4 per cent, believed the Alliance has performed as a coalition partner should. But only 2.1 per cent say they would reward the party with a vote. That is turning out to be the dilemma of junior partners. Two now have split under the pressure. It is not the way MMP was supposed to be.