IT’S PROBABLY the most important question progressive New Zealanders should be asking about the 2014 General Election. Can the Greens survive a coalition agreement with Labour?
Daily Blogster, Mike Treen, in his most recent posting “Coalition Governments and Real Change”, says: “No.” And he is well qualified to make such a judgement.
Between 1999 and 2002 Mike served as political adviser to the Alliance MP and Cabinet Minister, Matt Robson. When the Labour-Alliance coalition fell apart, and the Alliance itself imploded, over the question of New Zealand’s military involvement in Afghanistan, Mike had a ringside seat.
When he says that a party seeking fundamental changes in society cannot be “a minor part of a coalition government”, he is speaking from bitter experience.
If, in 2014, it transpires that the electorate returns sufficient Labour and Green MPs to form a coalition government, what should the Greens do – both before and after the election – to avoid the fate of NZ First, the Alliance, United Future and ACT?
Is it even possible for a “transformative” party, like the Greens, to be an effective player insideParliament, while continuing to build a movement for systemic change outside Parliament”?
One thing the Greens must understand before entering the first round of negotiations with their putative coalition partner is that the moment the door closes behind them, the Labour Party will treat them like dogs. That is to say: Labour will either toss their leaders a big juicy bone (i.e. seats at the Cabinet Table) to gnaw on, and watch them slaver appreciatively; or, sensing some unwillingness to be patted on the head and banished to a quiet corner, Labour will begin kicking the Greens with great force.
Why? Well, first and foremost, because Labour’s long-standing rule is to tolerate no enemies to its left. And, secondly, because Labour will be working on the assumption that the Greens are walking into the room with only two choices: take whatever Labour offers them; or, be held responsible for precipitating another election. Labour will not see the second choice as a viable political option because, in their view, any party reckless enough to refuse a coalition agreement and force another round of voting will be punished viciously by the electorate – to the point of being wiped out as a parliamentary force.
In major party game theory, the moment the vote-counting ends, the minor party’s practical political leverage falls instantly to zero. Assuming the Green’s leadership duo has already worked this out, Labour’s negotiators will be expecting them to happily accept whatever bones Labour condescends to toss their way. And, even if they’re not happy, Labour will still expect Russel Norman and Metiria Turei to have sufficient nous to smile broadly for the cameras and pretend to be ecstatic.
These are not unreasonable assumptions on Labour’s part. Indeed, this is precisely the way matters have played out since the arrival of MMP made coalition governments more or less inevitable. The minor party with sufficient seats to make a coalition possible is expected to do just that. And, once the deal is struck, the brute political realities of coalition government kick in. All policy gains are banked by the senior coalition partner, while all its political losses are shared with the junior partner. The latter has no way of avoiding the brickbats hurled by the electorate – most of whom see the coalition government as a single entity. In fact, they are often specifically targeted for failing to rein-in their less principled colleagues. “We thought your lot would make a difference,” sneers the disenchanted voter, “but it turns out that you’re no better than all the rest.”
This latter charge is one the Greens simply cannot afford to incur. If the Green brand stands for anything, it is for something new and different in politics: a political movement that refuses to accept all the usual “political realities” of deferred promises, diluted policies and deal-making behind closed doors. As an “anti-party party”, the Greens’ greatest virtue lies precisely in being much better than “all the rest”.
So, again, the question presents itself: What should the Greens do?
The only way out of this conundrum is to take the element in the political equation which Labour has identified as the Greens’ most obvious point of vulnerability, and turn it into their greatest source of strength.
Rather than cower in terror at the prospect of being blamed for precipitating a new general election, the Greens should march up to the negotiating table with an attitude that positively strobes: “BRING – IT – ON!” The Greens must make Labour believe that they do not fear a return to the hustings. On the contrary, they welcome it.
Providing Labour believes they are serious, something truly remarkable will then take place. The negotiating table will be turned 180 degrees, and it will be Labour that gives in to the Greens’demands.
But what could possibly make the Greens behave so confidently? How could they be so sure the electorate wouldn’t punish them for putting the country to the trouble and expense of another election?
The answer is remarkably simple: by giving the electorate a solemn undertaking that if neither Labour nor National are willing to commit to a very simple, very short and very necessary list of changes, the Greens will make sure that the people are given the chance to secure those policies directly – by switching their vote to the Greens in a second round of voting.
An important component of this strategy would be the Greens’ indifference as to which of the major parties implemented the five or six non-negotiable policies. Labour? National? The Greens would indicate their willingness to work with either party. Because, they would tell the country, what matters to them is not whether or not they become Cabinet Ministers: it is whether or not their well-signalled programme of reforms gets implemented.
Nothing could demonstrate more forcefully the “anti-party party” nature of the Greens than this willingness to forego all the trappings of political power if that is what it takes to secure the changes the country so desperately needs. Politics should not be about personalities, they will argue, it should be about getting things done.
This is the only position that confers upon the Greens the confidence necessary to openly court another election. Confronted with a refusal by both of the major parties to move on the Greens’ programme, Russel Norman and Metiria Turei, can stand before the television cameras and say, hands on hearts:
“We asked nothing for ourselves – we asked only for what we, and you, know is in the best interests of New Zealand. Again and again, over the past few days, we have urged both National and Labour to implement, with the Greens support, the change package so vital to building a just and prosperous New Zealand – and again and again both of the major parties have refused to give us that support. And that is why we are now refusing to support either of these tired old parties. We want to give you, the voters, a chance to pass judgement on those who put their own sectional interests ahead of the people’s interests. And so we say: let us go to the polls again; and this time let it be a straightforward referendum on the changes we are seeking; the changes which National and Labour have rejected. They think we are bluffing. Let us assure you all – this is no bluff. Let the people decide this country’s future direction in a new election. Our challenge to National and Labour is: BRING IT ON!”
Of course National would have no qualms about going toe-to-toe with the Greens in a second round of electoral fisticuffs, but that same prospect would almost certainly fill Labour with dread. Exposed to the voting public as the vicious old dog in the centre-left’s manger, there is every chance that it would be deserted by even its most faithful supporters and cease to exist as a major political party. For that very reason, Labour would embrace the Greens change package as its own, offer Russel, Metiria and a couple of their colleagues seats at the Cabinet Table, and, by doing so, sweep the possibility of a new election right off the table.
There is a chance – albeit a small one – that, rather than accede to the Greens’ demands, Labour might contemplate a Grand Coalition with National. Fine. Nothing could guarantee the demise of the Labour Party (as we have come to know it) more absolutely than such a final, desperate and treacherous capitulation to the Right.
And the contents of the Greens’ “change package”? Those five or six crucial changes upon which this whole strategy is based? Ah, well, defining those is the “fitness to govern” test which the Greens must pass if they are to avoid the fate of every other minor party which, even though they brought with them the longest of spoons, discovered that the price of supping with the Devil is always one’s soul.
Interesting perspective.
Definitely The greens need to hang tough.
People have had enough of the neo liberal bull…..
Change definitely needs to happen but how far are the greens prepared to go.
IMHO, this time around the answer can be made somewhat simpler.
IF, IF, IF Labour are prepared to ditch any temptation towards the neo-liberal (something a good many of the old guard in Labour still aren’t convinced in doing because it’s provided them with their comfort and baubles, and their claims to having paid their ‘dues’ providing them with a justification for their sense of entitlement); the ideology that seeks to commodify any and everything including the environment and sovereignty – then yes, a coalition could work.
If they’re not, then fcuk ’em. Confidence and supply only, and even then make it conditional.
Bear in ind too that if Labour doesn’t get its shit together very soon – just like Labo(u)r elsewhere – it’ll be its demise within the decade and there’ll be a matron, a bovver boy, a woose prone to hissy fits and a couple of others who’ll be to blame. Right now they’re becoming the architects of their own irrelevance.
Its exactly this sort of thing that won the greens my long term support. They named a line in the sand before an election (GMO testing) and when labour came expecting them to consider shifting after the vote they stood by their position. It was a position I didn’t entirely agree with but that didn’t matter – they stood by their position exactly add they said they would. Of course it wasn’t just that, I agreed with a lot of their other policy but they CHOSE PRINCIPLES OVER POWER.
Principles over power?
Anyone can have principles, but what good are strong values if you have no way of enacting them?
What’s the point in even being a political party if you have no aspirations of eventually being part of a government? Might as well just be a full time activist and not bother with wearing a suit and strutting round the beehive.
MMP is about the art of compromise and the Greens will have to embrace that if they want their legacy to be more that stuffing a few pink bats in some ceilings.
“A day in Government is worth a thousand in opposition!”
What we see in politics is that very few can have principals. If you aren’t fighting tooth and nail for them, what are you doing there in the first place?
@ Tamati
Power over principle?
Anyone can obtain power, but what good is power if you have no principles or policy to enact
What’s the point in even being a political party if you have no policy aspirations when being part of a government? Might as well just be a full time activist and not bother with wearing a suit and strutting round the beehive.
Your post makes no sense at all.
Anyone can obtain power?
No they can’t, you have to win an election.
I’m never said the Greens have to abandon all their principles, they just have to be pragmatic and flexible. That’s the nature of MMP.
I would love to see the Greens hold fort. I believe they have gained alot of respect throughout their time, and I don’t believe NZ will ever not have them play a part. Be is coalition or, dare i say it majority, New Zealanders are waking up to the need for us to safeguard our country, its people, and our environment. Neither Labour nor National can honestly coincide with these principles anymore. Its been a long hard tipsy turvy road, but the New New Zealand needs a change.
GREAT article Mr Trotter!
Pretty base speculation, Chris. I found myself wondering, what’s your agenda?
And then I read this:
lol CT, looks like you’re taking a leaf out of Mr. Craig’s hat on Face TV with MB couple of weeks ago.
You’ve missed a fairly obvious option. Labour’s neo-liberal museum pieces will not be for turning or being told what to do and would not “…embrace the Greens change package as its own…” and instead a bunch of them – maybe six, maybe up to ten – would split to form a new party, bring down the government and go into coalition with National. The reasons would be very Dunne-like, the need to provide responsible centrist government, you’ve got no idea how mad the Greens are behind closed doors, etc. Such a split would finish off Labour as a major political player, and as such although age and defeat would see the neo-liberal Labour faction whittled away to nothing over the next decade or so neo-liberal authoritarian government will locked in for another decade as well.
This is article paints tragic but likely outcome as we can see in today’s politics. It’s like watching a pack of dogs fighting over a bone as today neither side is prepared to listen to what the people want.
Government is there to serve the needs of the people, but the peoples needs have been lost sight of. The primary need is survival which is what the greens represent through protecting the environment whereas labour and national are hedging favour with their electorates and mates while indulging in crony capitalism at the expense of every one.
As I wrote http://suanqu.co.nz/a-green-future/, this is a learning curve for the Greens and they are stepping up to the plate.
But at the end of the day, it’s the population that needs to wake up before we get any further down the fascist rood we’re headed.
Tamati’s comments are precisely the same comments that Anderton gave to us in the Alliance back in 1998/9. In the end the Alliance sacrificed both its priniciples and its existence. The deal with Labour ultimately ripping it appart. Chris is correct, Labour can’t seem to abide the idea that there are other contenders on the left and spend years (along with their allies in the leading unions) attacking and vilifying the Alliance. In the end our leadership destroyed the party for them. The Greens need to play a tough and savy game in the coalition talks. Not doing so will cost them their independence and there possible political future.
” Labour can’t seem to abide the idea that there are other contenders on the left” – ANY left leaning party will be to the left of labour. They gave up the left years ago!
OK they’re not as far to the right as Aus or the UK, but they’ve been trying……..
Yep. I remember when the Greens were polling well during the Clark years, and Labour treated them terribly. It disgusted me, because I thought then that Labour should have been building a working partnership. I do believe, that the Greens will have learnt from that harsh lesson, and that they will deal with Labour in a much less naive way, especially given the personalities within the current Labour line-up.
Labour’s such a mixed bag of MPs – I heard Damien O’Conner on radio a few weeks ago talking about some government department saying “They need a boot up the backside” – I felt like I was back in the 1970s.
Shortest comment from me since the 80’s..
Takes a truly great article to do that.. Chris..
At last..,
BRING- IT- ON!
Nah, Labour will cobble together whoever it takes to make sure the Greens aren’t in coalition. Even Peters and Dunne
Good article Chris. Creative solutions. I don’t think the Alliance fell apart entirely because it was in coalition but also because it was not very united and there were a few novice mps whose egos got the better of them. The Greens seem remarkably savvy and quite mature in this sense. Labour have already been dragged to the left (i.e. adopting the greens’ housing policy) by the growing Green vote. Just have to expose the TPPA for what it is and embarrass them out of supporting that too.
I think this thread is brilliant, although of course as anyone can read it, all strategies are now in the open, but then transparent govt. is a Green ideal. How the peoples’ gathered money is spent, is the task of govt, and now with our internet savvy world, isn’t it time that the politicians started listening to the people on all the issues that concern us all. From insulating houses and awarding WOF’s to home owners, to cleaning up our waterways, looking after the wildlife, developing real climate change and industry incentives in waste, while also supporting families, the education sector, healthy food in schools, assisting the sick,disabled, and elderly, while developing Green jobs that pay living wages and also improve a communities finances, and developing a justice system that rehabilitates offenders, supports victims, and a country that promotes and develops an atmosphere of equality for all, from women’s rights to the indigenous people of Aotearoa etc! It seems to me that the raft of issues that we need to make change on in New Zealand/Aotearoa are huge, and the sooner the Greens and other caring individuals get onto it, there are some in Labour, the better for all of us. Just my humble point of view.
Comments are closed.