For most of my time here in New Zealand First, we’ve made a habit as a party of disregarding opinion-poll results on grounds they’re frequently inaccurate, and no substitute for the one poll that actually matters – which happens on election day.
During the Northland By-Election, however, this changed. All of a sudden, Winston was prepared to give credence (albiet with some sensible reservations) to the results of opinion polling in that electorate, which had him leading 54 to 34 against National’s Mark Osbourne.
Now, whether you subscribe to the slightly optimistic notion that opinion polling is continuing to get more and more accurate with each passing year (even where NZ First is concerned) – or, if you buy into the rather more grounded notion that the value in opinion polls is less to do with precise figures-converted-into-seats than with generalized trends and flows of support … there’s something interesting about each of the most recent Colmar Brunton and Reid Research opinion polls.
And I don’t just mean the fact they’ve both got John Key’s personal popularity taking a reasonable hit (between 2 and 4.6%, respectively).
Look at where Winston is, and then look at where Andrew Little is.
In the Colmar Brunton, they’re neck-in-neck on 9% each.
In the Reid Research, they’re well within margin of error of one another – Winston on 11.2%, Little on 11.6%. A knife’s-edge separation of statistical insignificance.
This is not exactly a novel trend, either. Its roots go all the way back to 1996, where for a brief historical moment New Zealand First completely eclipsed Labour in the polls to become our Nation’s second-largest political party. Of course, we all know what happened there.
More recently, right the way from our storming re-entry into politics like a tungsten-clad Thunderhawk back in 2011, there seems to have been this unofficial competition of sorts between ourselves and the Labour Party over who’s *actually* leading this country’s Opposition.
Now, I might be the *teensiest* bit biased on this score, and freely acknowledge my fairly Kim DotCom sized conflict of interest when it comes to acting as an impartial adjudicator … but from where I’m sitting it’s become increasingly apparent ever since that point in late 2011 that it is they, not we, who seem to be witnessing their relevance fade off into the ether and relegation to “minor party” status become increasingly inevitable.
Meanwhile, the Party which tens if not hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders inexorably look to, in ever-increasing numbers, for protection from threats both domestic (e.g en-Beehived) and international to our sovereignty, economy, and way of life … is New Zealand First.
On everything from housing to superannuation, and from state assets through to opposition to the TPPA, we can stand truly proud as the leading Party not just of Opposition, but of Protection – and Responsibility.
Almost as importantly, when it comes to harrowing the Government in the House, you will STILL find no equal for Winston in full flight – and proving we are far more than just a one man band … who could forget Ron Mark’s awesome offensive against sending Kiwi troops back into Iraq. Or, less prosaically, the forthright expression of views he engaged in more recently – which captured the sentiments toward Government of most of a Nation.
But I didn’t set finger to keyboard and pen this piece with a view to enumerating the ways in which NZ First gives hope to the ordinary Kiwi. I’ve got an entire Facebook wall and occasionally twitter-feed that’s often dedicated almost exclusively to same.
Instead, I wished to mark the occasion of Winston’s support in the Prefered Prime Minister-ship stakes drawing even with Little’s. And remark that this effectively means that the numbers-game side of things (all important in politics – even and perhaps especially when dealing with the abstract, imaginary-if-not-downright-
I’m sure that over the coming weeks and months we shall continue to see this trend perpetuate itself, as Labour continues its slow ebb into obscurity, while NZF’s support will merely continue to increase.
Because New Zealanders know that there’s one party above all others whom they can truly trust as leaders of the Opposition to be able to Put New Zealand First.
Winston IS THE REAL opposition alright.
Winston is truly the only true leader that we all must embrace as he gives all he has for the downtrodden and for the other regions forgotten by national, and is now standing up for us Kiwi’s against all others flowing here today from abroad in the name of “NZ First”.
So f you want REAL representation pick Winston to lead here for those who need support.
And we hope like many others now do, that Labour, Greens, and other minor opposition parties join with NZ First to form an effective block to combine for a real credible attack on this Corporate backed junta running this country against the will and support of selling this country out from under us all today.
Hear hear Cleangreen.
One of the things Iv’e always liked and supported about Nz First – and in particular Winston – is that they are relevant totally in this time yet maintain a lot of the elements of old school politics.
Old school as in a time when govt was a lot more see through , when – and this is the biggest one of all – neo liberalism had not yet come into being through the treachery of Roger Douglas .
Roger Douglas and his backers in the 1984 Labour party – many of which are still there as lieutenants to make sure neo liberalism remains entrenched in that party.
Winston was of a time of Keynesian economics , and when national sovereignty and patriotism wasn’t a dirty word and the term globalism meant something found on a geographical map.
Winston was of a time when a fair days work for a fair days pay wasn’t just a platitude – it was a reality.
Winston was of a time when the very things such as SOE’s that previous generations had poured their taxes into to ensure a fair shake for ALL people was always assumed to be the property of the New Zealanders themselves.
And no – one else’s to be bought and sold at will to charge us exorbitantly and cream a profit out of ordinary kiwi’s.
It was a time when we really did have a sense of who we are – and weren’t being clandestinely manipulated by any super powers as grotesquely as this ‘ Key ‘ character is doing right now.
So yeah – Labour is paying the price for doing exactly NOTHING about those subversive neo liberals and all they stand for within its ranks and caucus ( and rightly so that they should be feeling the heat )….and NZ First , Winston and Ron will continue to rise as conditions worsen in this country.
Full support.
And that goes for any other potential allies that express the desire and policy to return this country back to health and end the insanity of neo liberalism.
Winston was originally a National Party MP. Don’t forget that.
Winston Peters says things the people want to hear and can easily understand.
Andrew Little says things the people either don’t want to hear, or can’t be bothered to try and understand.
That sums it up Mike the Lefty. Pander to the lowest common denominator. Mind you he’s nowhere near as bad as Key.
Perhaps some might like to reflect on the fact that during Helen Clark’s first 3 years as leader of the Labour Party she averaged 5% in the preferred prime minister stakes. Indeed a group of her colleagues were so alarmed they tried to coerce her into stepping down. And look where she ended up….
Yep, preffered PM is a completely useless metric.
Hogwash, Winston Peter’s the ‘champion’ of the poor and downtrodden, now that is one hell of a Larf,
Credit where credit is due, Peter’s has held the line on Superannuation for so many years now i cannot put a number to them,
Words are easy, simply political hyperbole and rhetoric, last time Winston was ‘in Government’ with Clark’s Labour Government poverty increased at the same rate as poverty increased under the previous National Government as badly as it increased in the first two terms of the current one,
Did Peter’s object to beneficiary dependent families who pay income tax, no thanks to the Lange Labour Government, being shut out of the Working for Families tax credit scheme,
Hardly, NZFirst happily voted for that Legislation thus helping to put in place today’s abhorrent child poverty,
Pfft, Winston Peters the ‘champion’ of the poor and downtrodden, i Larf some more, sadly…
Winston was preferred Prime Monster through most of the 90s. If I remember rightly, this started even before he left National, and may have been the reason he formed NZ First after being set aside by National in favour of Bolger.
Through most of the 90s, Labour stagnated at around 20% support, with a lot of its voters feeling betrayed by Rogernomics, and switching support to the Alliance, and NZ First. Sound familiar? Swap the Greens for the Alliance and the situation has been pretty much the same since 2008.
What kept Labour going in the 90s and brought them back from total disarray was choosing a capable leader in Helen Clark, and giving her time to build a public profile. In contrast the constant leader-swapping over the last three terms (Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little) has made the party look confused and divided, and failed to give voters a chance to get comfortable with one leader. As a result Metiria Turei and Russell Norman have effectively served as the consistent leaders of the Opposition for most of this time.
Now Winston – familiar as the old dusty couch on your porch – gets a huge whack of free publicity thanks to bi-election, and surprise, surprise, he is now more recognised than either Little, Metiria, or the new Greens co-leader (who almost nobody has heard of). I hope the old lizard enjoys his time in the sun, but none of this preferred Prime Monster stuff has ever said anything about the relative popularity of parties.
Did NZ First sweep Labour aside and become the new leaders of the opposition in the 90s? Nope. In 1996 they did a deal to keep Bolger and the Nats in power, just as I kept telling their left-wing supporters they would. This fractured the party, which lost a chunk of the MPs they brought into parliament to short-lived turncoat party Mauri Pacific. Did they sweep Labour aside in 2005? Nope. They did a deal to keep Clark and Labour in power, no doubt horrifying the conservative right-wingers who expected them to back National again. Having betrayed both their left and right wing grassroots, they dropped below 5% and disappeared from parliament.
I hope Winston and the rest of the party learned the lesson. But the political amnesia evident in this blog post concerns me. How can we be sure Winston won’t do a deal to keep Key and the Nats in power in 2017 if NZ First activists don’t seem to know their own history?
In 1996 they did a deal to keep Bolger and the Nats in power,
Forget this at your peril.
Yes – some fair enough points , however as you have said – there was a knee jerk reaction against Labour during that era..typically because they were the ones who enabled the Rogernomes.
So Peters was damned if he did , damned if he didn’t.
So…the upshot was – he sided with National – partly to provide ‘stable ‘ govt – partly because he knew the populace were still down on Labour for introducing Rogernomics.
And as you recall….Labour promised a new , softer approach then previously under Helen Clarke….so , the natural pick would be to read the mood of the nation and go Labour . Which he did.
Now , bearing in mind both Winston and Jim Anderton both opposed Rogernomics …and left to form their own opposition party’s to it , and not being either the major party on either Left or right….but instead ,…finding yourself in the middle – and by definition holding the balance of power by default ….
The onus is on you , the person holding that balance to cut a deal that gains you the concessions you feel are most paramount.
I also think that another reason Winston gained publicity was that he is – whether we like it or not – now one of the more longer term servers in parliament. And Key is quite scared of him . It shows. He displays a lightning fast ability to turn the tables on Key that Key just cant match.
So Key resorts to petty insults to deride him – and which also proved to be self humiliating regards Northland. Key would have been far better to keep his mouth shut firmly and not underestimate Peters .
No one should on today’s political scene.
So if one were to look objectively at why Peters did what he did through those times…it would appear that it was in reaction to the public mood regards the neo liberal reforms…the difficulty was both Labour and National were thoroughly overtaken by neo liberal ideology.
There really wasn’t much choice.
I will furnish an example by that means :
Both National and Labour had , – at that time , – two sitting board members of the Mont Pelerin Society ( a far right capitalist think tank ) who were , very conveniently – both of them appointed as Ministers of Finance .
Two key positions in any govt , and both belonging to the same think tank yet in opposing party’s.
They were : Roger Douglas of Labour , – and Ruth Richardson of National.
And most people wouldn’t even know the significance of that or who or what the Mont Pelerin Society really are.
But it didn’t matter which party you voted for…you were still going to get the same deconstruction of NZ no matter which. And that was what confounded the people of NZ so much – they just didn’t realize who they were being taken in by.
So finally, into this unholy mix Peters has to make a decision. And it was a decision that had to made …even without so many of his supporters understanding WHY he had to decide in a particular way.
Proof of this ?
Ask the average New Zealander who the Mont Pelerin Society is …and most will stare blankly back at you and say .. ” the Mont who Society ? ”
You’re missing the third option Winston had in both 1996 and 2005, which was to refuse to become part of a government with neoliberal snakes-in-the-grass. This would have been the principled decision, (especially in 1996) and was the option the Greens regularly took. But it would also have left Winston with less power, prestige, or privilege.
Sadly the Greens are now also so desperate to reward their party faithful with some time in government that they are willing to get into bed with a clearly unreformed neoliberal Labour party. Opponents of neoliberalism have no real option under the parliamentary system, and its time we started envisioning and working towards a form deep democracy that doesn’t leave us subject to the whims of despotic political parties.
There is another angle to actually giving confidence and supply to a govt that is or isn’t popular with the people.
Which is also a principled stand.
By doing so – you can curb excesses and pressure the govt /largest party into dropping unpopular bills, changing certain aspects of policy , and gaining concessions .
Which cannot be done from the outside looking in all that effectively.
To believe that a minority coalition partner can “curb excesses and pressure the govt /largest party into dropping unpopular bills, changing certain aspects of policy , and gaining concessions” is to believe that the tail can wag the dog. On the contrary, the experiences of the Alliance, NZ First, United Future, the Maori Party, and ACT prove that the main effect of going into coalition with Labour or National is to decimate your own vote, with little effect on government policy. Again, NZ First supporters need to learn from their party’s history to avoid making the same mistakes.
You don’t have to be part of a coalition government to give confidence and supply to the less wrong major party, while you build enough support to replace them. Again, this is what the Greens have done in the past, and IMHO should continue to do. I’d hate to see them join that list of juiced junior partners, but I suspect if they go into coalition with a neoliberal lite Labour, that’s exactly what will happen.
“So if one were to look objectively at why Peters did what he did through those times…it would appear that it was in reaction to the public mood regards the neo liberal reforms”
No, Winston just likes to be on the winning team, or the one he feels he can manipulate into giving him a fancy title like Treasurer, which hasn’t existed in NZ before or since.
Winston is an issues cherry-picker, as he has to be as a one-man-band (sorry, Curwen). A leader, maybe, a useful voice, certainly. But hardly “the Leader”. That is just partisan tosh.
He will make a useful contribution to opposition if he is not distracted by side issues, but calling him the Leader is just a vanity-project. I doubt that he would claim that mantle. But it is true that leadership has to be earned so we watch with interest.
(Note: momentum is a funny thing. It can turn on a dime. But it must be turned. We often have a tendency to be our own worst enemies. We get lost in the weeds. We forget to learn from history. We confuse rage with wisdom.
I am still thinking about the Greens’ James Shaw saying to sympathetic Nats that he wanted their vote, and that he wanted to prove to them that he could be a responsible steward of the economy. Sometimes that kind of clarity can be a good strategy.
To say why people are probably suspicious of you and yet why they should still support you can attract the attention you need while giving the appearance of both self awareness and a kind of fearlessness.)
You’ve got to hand it to him, Winnie is as clever a politician as any we’ve seen in NZ. But as said above, he’s brilliant in opposition, totally ineffective in Govt. The reason Curwen hits the mark is because of how poor Little has been as much as how effective Peters is.
He was actually a very effective Minister of Foreign Affairs , however.
And felt comfortable in his own skin candidly mixing it with leaders on the world stage – unlike this current ‘ pm ‘ who fawns to both Obama and the Queen.
And pulls hair.
Winston’s an opportunist with a dog whistle. He knows how to use it, but once you get past the racism and the points of order he’s got nothing. The sooner ‘leftists’ stop giving him the time of day the better.
Railing against foreign capital is completely missing the point.
So ..you agree with selling off of our SOE’s…well its easy to see where your coming from.
You’d be in complete agreement with the ‘ Double Dipper from Dipton ‘ Bill English who stated ” We should be glad we have a low wage economy as this encourages foreign investment ”……………
Codespeak for ” We should be glad we have a low wage economy as this encourages a pool of work slaves to work on minimum wages to make corporate investors rich so I can gain large profits in shareholders dividends ”….
You seem to like the idea of foreign workers enticed over here to work as taxi drivers when they have a PHD in various fields…do you LIKE poverty classes ?…Are you a racist mate?
What do you REALLY gain from neo liberalism ? A chance to exploit human beings for your comfort funds?
Are you an arsehole?
Hell – you sure seem like it.
Come on Curwen, let us respect and give credit to Winston, all right, but knocking others in opposition will not help us that much. I agree that Andrew Little is struggling to get traction in the polls, and Labour stuffed up big, by giving in on the pollsters, and not stick with David Cunliffe or another one capable of leading the party.
Divide and rule is what Key and Nats know as experts in that strategy. We all would love to have a more united, formidable force in opposition, as long as we have Labour, Greens and NZ First appear too much like competing with each other, we will not get far, I fear.
I raised it before, perhaps a new united, progressive force, that is different and takes a concerted approach, combining the best of all opposition parties, and also making the overdue effort to interest the too many disillusioned and non voters to vote again.
That is the direction we should be taking, for now, stuff the polls, I dare to not bother listening to MSM driven, foreseeable polls, it is like self fulfilling prophecies, as Hooton, Farrar and Hide love it.
BTW I know that a lot of principled anti-racist economic nationalists are part of the resurgence of support for NZ First, and I want to work with you as allies, just as I do Labour supporters. But I urge both groups to take off the rose-tinted glasses with which you seem to view your own party’s leadership, and do the internal democratic work to make sure your party’s caucus is capable of really representing its activists and voters.
Comments are closed.