Members at the party’s AGM in Christchurch decided by consensus on Saturday to put the question of whether to use the waka-jumping law back to members. In the next month, members at the party’s many branches up and down the country will discuss the issue and what they would like done.
On September 1, delegates from those branches will congregate at a Special General Meeting to decide Tana’s fate. A “consensus” position or 75% of delegates will be required to take the decision to waka-jump Tana.
It is not clear where the members stand on the issue. One member spoken to by the Herald said that members had a “kaupapa” and “expectations” of their MPs to respect that kaupapa.
“We’ve given our support and we’ve endorsed people, we expect them to be respectful and to behave with integrity and decency,” they said.
But another member said that their branch was evenly divided on whether to use the waka-jumping law. The Herald has seen other members vent their outrage the party is even entertaining the idea of using the waka-jumping law to evict Tana.
Swarbrick and the caucus seem to quite clearly back using the waka-jumping law to the extent they have already fired the starting gun on it, writing to Tana, who uses they/them pronouns, to say they believe the defection has disturbed the proportionality of Parliament.
Tana has 21 days to respond, the statutory threshold set by the 2018 waka-jumping law. It means that if the party delegates decide on September 1 to use the law, Tana could be gone relatively quickly.
The fact that the caucus appears to have taken a side and begun the process has frustrated some members who don’t support using the law, with some Greens using social media to vent their disquiet at the move.
It’s not just pride and principle on the line. If Tana stays an independent MP, the Greens lose a significant portion of the parliamentary funding they had expected to get up until the next election. That could mean a small amount of staff could be cut back.
The focus on Tana is understandable. There is an uncomfortable irony that the Greens may be the first party to actually use the waka-jumping law, despite having opposed it so vociferously for so long. If the party does choose to trigger the law, it will have to weather an uncomfortable but inevitable howl of “I told you so” from none other than Winston Peters, the spiritual father of the current law, who became something of a bête noire for the party in Government.
Swarbrick’s softly, softly approach to members is understandable too. Green members have an awful lot of power over their caucus; the members can, if they want, boot the leaders from office. Giving members at least some ownership of the decision now will save Swarbrick trouble down the line.
Yes, the party would perhaps be more lethal in Parliament if its MPs and staff spent less time agonising over Tana and more time prosecuting the Government, but if that came at the cost of a less engaged membership, it would probably mean the Greens becoming less lethal during the campaign, when the Greens summon an army of volunteers that puts up a creditable fight against the established machines of Labour and National. Members might cause the MPs to scream into their pillows now, but they’ll need them when it comes to holding on to the party’s 15 seats.
Behind the Tana Drama was a party licking its wounds with some members so bruised by a session discussing and mourning Faʻanānā Efeso Collins that a couple could not bring themselves to talk to media afterwards.
Other items were, refreshingly more pedestrian. There was a long private debate about the definition of officeholders under incorporated society legislation. A couple of members cited this as an example of why this AGM – Tana issues aside – was one of the drier party affairs in recent years.
Swarbrick delivered two speeches. One, looking back at the party’s history, making a coded argument that the party could hew to its values and waka-jump Tana at the same time.
The second, was a full throated attack on the Government, whose right-leaning agenda is a gift for the Greens, who are currently polling about 12% in some polls.
Before Tana changed the script, this AGM was meant to be about Swarbrick charting a road map to delivering on her ambition, and campaign promise, to turn the party into the dominant force on the left of politics.
She talked up Green wins, citing examples of where she’d pressed Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in Parliament, and areas where the Greens had exposed the Government’s failings.
The “announcement” (political conferences are often built around these “announcements”, usually a policy or a new campaign) was fairly “meh”: an open letter to the Prime Minister on renting. However, it was well targeted and clever in its own way. Swarbrick challenged members to get 10 people they knew to sign on to the letter – a canny campaign to get more people involved in the party and probably harvest their email addresses for party purposes.
As Swarbrick noted in her speech, 1.4 million Kiwis rent, and the Greens are gunning unambiguously for their votes, which could boost the party’s tally considerably (even acknowledging that some of that 1.4 million will be children). The party netted 330,000 votes at the last election. Renters appear to skew Green, with the three electorates the party holds having a relatively high proportion of rending households.
It’s a strong issue for the Greens, and one where the party can hope to have some success. Shifting the needle on climate change can take time. Making it harder for landlords to evict tenants or lift the standards of their properties can bear fruit for voters more quickly.
In policy, if not in party process, the Green appreciate the virtues of speed.
Thomas Coughlan is deputy political editor and covers politics from Parliament. He has worked for the Herald since 2021 and has worked in the Press Gallery since 2018.
