Furious Peters dismisses talk of balance of power

The NZ First leader tells Audrey Young his party won't be held responsible for how Parliament stacks up after the election.

Compared with the last election, Winston Peters is a different man.

The New Zealand First leader gets irritated at talk of his party holding the balance of power, or "balance of responsibility" as he was once fond of describing it.

"Don't put it all on my shoulders and try to make it our responsibility. That's what I am getting really furious about," he told the Weekend Herald.

Cynicism towards Mr Peters' record on coalitions - his pledge to get rid of National, choosing National as coalition partner, and the ugly split with National - dictated that he needed a fresh position going into this election.

Now he is talking up the prospect of sitting on Parliament's cross-benches and voting issue by issue - "keeping them honest."

That is bound to sound more appealing to voters than holding the balance of power, more commonly described as "holding the country to ransom" when applied to Mr Peters.

But it is also Mr Peters' fourth major twist on coalition-making since the collapse of the National-NZ First coalition - and it is contrary to the party's view at its annual conference.

A resolution put up by the Hunua branch suggesting that NZ First sit on the cross-benches was heavily defeated.

Drawing on that vote, Mr Peters said in his speech that his party did not have the option of sitting on the fence.

A little over three months later, that is the proposition.

Asked if his new position flew in the face of the conference, he said: "No, it does nothing of the sort. The reality is that the party conference is adamant about things we stand for. They want those things to be in Government, and if they will not be and cannot be, then they will want us to do what I am saying here."

Sitting on the cross-benches is power without responsibility: the party has the power to okay or veto others' proposals but little power to push through its own initiatives.

If NZ First ends up with the balance of power, as yesterday's New Zealand Herald-DigiPoll survey suggests, it may not rush to the cross-benches.

National and Labour would still want to sew up NZ First's support to get a majority on confidence and supply - presuming they can't first do a coalition deal.

And NZ First would almost certainly try to extract some price for its support on confidence and supply.

But any auction will be conducted differently to the nine-week talks with National and Labour that tortured much of the country after the last election.

Mr Peters has suggested talks would last only three weeks, and he would wait for the main parties to come courting him.

In a speech this week, he nominated several issues on which he would want to see change: pensions, student loans, export incentives, child health, corporate tax dodgers and rural policy.

"We will not be giving you a blank cheque," Mr Peters said. "But we will give you confidence and supply if you are prepared to do something for the people of New Zealand for a change."