Seymour gleefully filled in the details. The characters included Brash "the crazy old uncle" cast in the Shakespearean role of the go-between, the nurse in Romeo and Juliet. The scene was a cafe in central Auckland, where Brash offered Act's president John Thompson the deal of a lifetime: to double the size of its caucus by welcoming in Williamson.
Seymour's response was arch. He pointed out Act was trying to get people to actually vote for it. Seymour later expressed regret for the more cutting phrases he had used, but stuck to his main point - that Act was trying to rebuild and a Jurassic attachment would not be helpful. The Act caucus room was not the pot at the end of Maurice's infamous big gay rainbow.
There could have been short term advantages in it for Act. It would have given them the safety blanket of a second electorate and eroded the Maori Party's influence. The Prime Minister said Williamson delivered his defence by text messages. It amounted to a denial he approached Act or asked anyone else to do so. Key added, without much conviction, that he took Williamson at his word. That was likely because he had no choice. If he did not he would have to move against Williamson and the last thing National wants is for it to be even trickier to muster a majority than it is already. Most people believe Seymour's version of events. It is hard to believe Brash would act off his own bat without even discussing it with Williamson. That said, stranger things have happened and he is a somewhat clumsy Machiavelli.
Fortunately for Key, Williamson's dislike of the media is even greater than his apparent dislike of Key's compassionate conservatism. The chances he will go "feral" in public are slim, although he does have history and a grievance over being forced to give up his ministerial portfolios. It should nonetheless start ringing alarm bells about increasing signs of restiveness on the right of National. The main outlet for that appears to be the health and safety reforms which have been put on hold for another two months after objections within National about the impact on farmers and business.
Amusing as the Williamson overture was, it also showed Seymour had a bit of chutzpah about him. Seymour has also been earning his stripes in a more serious and constructive fashion on superannuation.
Seymour had contacted the leaders of all other parties bar NZ First to propose a cross party committee and referendum. To his credit, Labour leader Andrew Little did appear to take Seymour seriously, saying Labour would consider it if he could get other parties on board. Little then rather undid that. He talked tough about the need to address the future costs of super and mused aloud about a form of means testing. He then denied he was talking about means testing while continuing to say it was unfair working people over 65 got super while their 35-year-old colleagues did not. It is unknown whether his deputy Annette King, 67, had a view on that. This raised questions about other apparent disparities. Was it still unfair if the 35-year-old was benefiting from Working for Families - a policy that the 65-year-old had not benefited from because it did not exist when he was 35?
Little explained Labour was still reviewing its policy. It will be a very small review because by now Little had effectively ruled out any changes at all beyond resuming payments to the Super Fund at some future point. Even musing about changes will be enough to put distrust in the minds of voters. There will be suspicion among voters about what it might spring on them if it is re-elected into government. Of course, if Labour did move toward means testing, Williamson could well have found the new home he was looking for.
