KEY POINTS:
PERFORMANCE RATING: 6/10
The defection of Gordon Copeland took the united out of United Future. It would have resulted in a lower score if not for Dunne's feat in managing to get business tax cuts out of Labour.
Although Mr Dunne is often mocked as a goody two shoes, it has proved a steady, safe support partner for Labour while its less boring support partners have imploded.
Deserves some marks for nonetheless proving it would not be a lapdog to its governing partner by refusing to back major pieces of legislation which impacted on the families it claims to represent, such as the Emissions Trading Scheme.
ACHIEVEMENTS AND FAILURES
Has had 13 of the 14 points in confidence and supply agreement met, including drop in the business tax rate to 30 per cent, removing the cap on tax rebates for charitable donations and introducing development tax credits for businesses. Increased parental income threshold for student allowances.
New Zealanders also have United Future to thank for an extra three weeks of daylight saving and opening more areas of countryside up for public access.
Mr Dunne wants more progress made on the use of private hospitals for elective surgery. The defection of Mr Copeland blighted the party's record as a stable partner. However, given his attempts to set up a new party, Mr Dunne has some justification for saying the party has ended up better off without him.
ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
A pragmatic politician, Mr Dunne has a record as a stable, reliable partner in various support agreements with governments. However, the party's willingness to swing behind either Labour or National to get into government opens it to charges of politics of expedience.
Has started to throw its weight around a bit more. The two MPs have also shown they will not be taken for granted - voting against major pieces of legislation including the Emissions Trading Scheme, Real Estate Agents Bill and pulling its initial support for the Electoral Reform Act after the public outcry over it.
Common sense comes at a price - by targeting middle New Zealand and refusing to bow to populism, the party lacks the clear, distinct constituency of the Maori Party, Greens and NZ First.
Instead it relies on those in middle New Zealand who can't make their minds up over National and Labour. This leaves it more susceptible to being squeezed out by the battle between the two large parties
POLICIES TO WATCH FOR
Wants a top business and personal tax rate of 30 per cent and a flatter personal tax rate system - 10 per cent up to $12,000, 20 per cent from $12,000 to $38,000 and 30 per cent above $38,000.
Also wants optional income splitting for parents and paid parental leave for up to 12 months. Health is also a priority and policies include a free annual health check, and more use of private hospitals to shrink waiting lists. Wants a guarantee of surgery within six months for over 65s.
WHAT IT NEEDS TO DO
A certainty to get back in because of Mr Dunne's hold on the Ohariu Belmont electorate seat. Will need about 1.5 per cent to ensure Judy Turner also returns.
Mr Dunne will be disadvantaged more than most by Helen Clark and John Key's refusal to enter televised debates with the minor party leaders - a key forum to show off his "common sense" approach and ability to deal with both sides.
Mr Dunne has sniffed the air and has begun courting National. Must now play to swing voters who don't want Labour back but are nervous about National having too much power. United Future has profited more when National is on the ebb, as it did in 2002.
National now takes up more of United Future's space than in the past and Mr Dunne has already recognised the only way to combat this is to push the need for centre parties to ensure the major parties don't lurch to the right or left after being elected.
IN A NUTSHELL
After two terms of having one MP and polling less than 1 per cent, it reached a zenith in 2002 with eight MPs and 6.7 per cent of the vote.
Success followed leader Peter Dunne's performance in a leaders' debate and a collapse in the National Party vote. Returned in 2005 with 2.7 per cent and three MPs - Mr Dunne, Judy Turner and Gordon Copeland. Term was blemished by Mr Copeland's defection last year, claiming the anti-smacking bill as his cause.
A centrist party, it positions itself as the protector of middle-class families. It has had confidence and supply agreements with Labour for the past two terms, including Mr Dunne as a minister outside Cabinet with the revenue portfolio.
In post-election talks, it will talk first with the major party with most votes. Mr Dunne has said the election is "National's for the losing". Is not ruling out changes in the campaign, but has aligned himself with National more in the past year.
Its top five list candidates are Peter Dunne, Judy Turner, party president Denise Krum, Graeme Reeves and Pulotu Selio Solomon.
Q & A WITH LEADER PETER DUNNE
You claim to represent families and "the silent majority" of middle class New Zealand. Food prices are going up, the economy is in trouble, what's your recipe for them?
I think the tax cuts that started [last week] are a good start, but we would go further. We've said 10 per cent up to the first $12,000, 20 per cent between $12,000 and $38,000 and 30 per cent above $38,000.
We would bring in voluntary income splitting for parents with dependent children up to the age of 18 and would also be looking to maintain the support Working for Families and the various other income support mechanisms provide.
What is your point of difference from other parties?
Our policy response is a mixture of an open, competitive economic environment, but recognising the state has much wider responsibilities in the area of health and education. It's a combination of the left and the right in that sense.
We are a solid, reliable performer that's never failed on any agreement we've entered into.
Do you think the Gordon Copeland situation damaged your reputation?
It did in the short term, particularly the circumstances in which it happened, which was conniving and secretive. But frankly I think as a party and a support partner for government we've actually been much better off once that cord was cut. We've been more stable and reliable.
More honourable. We've found for every one member we've lost through that process, we've gained three.
Helen Clark has said this election is about trust. Do you agree?
I think it is, but I don't think it's the trust she's talking about. I think it's not which of the major parties do you trust in government - they're going to be there anyway.
It's a question of which of the smaller parties do you trust to keep the big guys honest.
Labour maintains National has a "hidden agenda". Do you agree with that?
Well, I'm not sure. All I would say is if they have a hidden agenda it's going to be very difficult for them to run a government with support partners if suddenly after the election they are revealed in all their glory.
Your priorities seem to fit more neatly with National than Labour. Is that true?
We've achieved a lot working with Labour. The question I suppose we have to consider and resolve in the aftermath of this election is what more can we achieve with them. But we certainly have achieved a lot and I'd want to build on those achievements with whoever the next government is.
National has indicated it will merge the Children's Commissioner into the Families Commission. Would you support that?
Well, I've had discussions with National on that and my position is we do not want to see the Families Commission downgraded in any way.
If the merger they're talking of means effectively the Children's Commissioner is upgraded to the same status that could work.
National also plans to remove the research and development tax credits you introduced. What's your reaction?
When the tax credits were set up, they were given a three-year time frame and there would be a review at the end of that to see how effective they were.
There was a real question of what the level of business uptake would be, whether they would be properly utilised or squandered. I think it's too early to make that call yet, but I think we should go through the review process and make a decision as to whether that's the most effective mechanism.
What happened to your proposal of small parties uniting as a joint force for post-election negotiations?
Well that is still on the table to some extent because we haven't had post-election negotiations as yet. The point I was trying to get to there was that hitherto the talks have been between a big party and a small party.
That big party might be talking to several small parties, and the small parties don't actually know what's being agreed along the way. Maybe there's some merit in swapping notes as we go to make sure we're not being played off against one another.
Has Winston Peters done anything to damage MMP?
He's damaged his own reputation and that of his party, and sent out a pretty clear warning signal that you touch him at your peril. Whether that's damaged MMP I'm not sure.
Do you think National will have a show with the Maori Party at all?
I think that's a very hard thing to see happening because it's not quite clear what the Maori Party want and it's very clear that what Maori Party voters want is not to have a relationship with National.
