Shaneel Lal: Election 2023: Christopher Luxon’s coalition with Act, NZ First will come at the cost of stability

National leader Christopher Luxon, Act leader David Seymour and New Zealand First leader Winston Peters; their parties' potential coalition is shaping up to be a colossal mess from all angles, says Shaneel Lal. Photos / NZME

OPINION

The polls show National will need both Act and New Zealand First to form the next government, putting NZ First leader Winston Peters back in the kingmaker position.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins has ruled him out, describing Peters as a “force of instability and chaos”. However, Luxon says he will work with Peters if that means he can keep Labour out of government.

Does the desire to keep Labour out of government justify bringing Peters back into power?

Peters is problematic. His policies are at odds with National’s most crucial policies. And he isn’t adored by his potential coalition partner and Act leader, David Seymour. Hipkins is right. Peters brings chaos, and any government that has NZ First as its coalition partner would assist Peters in unleashing just that on New Zealanders.

Luxon should rule out NZ First based purely on the views of its candidates. Rob Ballantyne, speaking about the “disingenuous Māori elite”, said: “Cry if you want to, we don’t care. You pushed it too far. We are the party with the cultural mandate and courage to cut out your disease and bury it permanently.”

It’s a comment both Hipkins and Luxon agree is racist.

When Luxon says he is willing to work with NZ First despite considering Ballantyne’s views racist, he says he will work with people he considers racist if that means he can come into power.

But that’s not the end of it. Peters has a history of doing and saying harmful things to marginalised communities. Peters has voted against every law advancing the rights of queer people. He voted against the Abortion Legislation Act, he called immigration an “Asian invasion”, he and his candidate Lee Donoghue are campaigning on banning transgender women from women’s toilets, and he has defended Ballantyne’s comments. There is ample evidence that Peters is not conducive to Aotearoa’s social cohesion.

Luxon may turn a blind eye to Peters’ and NZ First’s asinine views on marginalised people, but he will not be able to ignore that Peters is opposed to National’s most crucial policy. National is proposing a $14.6 billion tax cut over four years. Twenty per cent of National’s tax cut will be funded by a foreign buyers’ tax, which requires that property is sold to foreign buyers. Peters is a staunch advocate against foreign buyers and strongly supports banning foreign buyers from purchasing New Zealand property. It is inconceivable a National and NZ First coalition would be a success, given their disagreement goes to the most fundamental element of National’s campaign promises.

But let’s pretend National somehow convinces Peters to retract his opposition to foreign buyers. There is yet another hurdle, this time by the name of Seymour, in the way of a smooth National and NZ First coalition. At the minor parties leaders debate Peters joked that Seymour was not an adult. Seymour says he will only enter a coalition with National and NZ First if NZ First is kept out of Cabinet. That will not happen if National and Act need the party to form the next government.

Peters is one of the most stubborn and self-important politicians New Zealand has ever seen. There is no doubt he will demand the role of deputy prime minister and that some NZ First MPs be given ministerial roles in Cabinet.

National should rule the party out and communicate to New Zealanders that it is committed to delivering a stable government. The National-Act-NZ First coalition is shaping up to be a colossal mess from all angles. By entertaining the idea of a coalition with NZ First, National is being complicit in NZ First’s regressive and dangerous views while creating a government that’ll be dysfunctional because its members disagree on fundamental finance policies and have personality clashes.

Shaneel Shavneel Lal (they/them) was instrumental in the bill to ban conversion therapy in New Zealand. They are a law and psychology student, model and influencer.