Similar Posts

One Comment

  1. … ” The debate over whether or not there should be a binding referendum on eliminating the Maori electorates as suggested by NZ First looks like it’s more mischief making by Winston than genuine policy ” …

    You have just answered yourself , Willie.

    Here’s five reasons why he did it.

    1) It takes soft Nat voters away from National and strengthens Peters bargaining chips with National if he chooses to go that way.

    2) It ensures that Labour cannot take him for granted and marginalize him in preference to the Greens because :

    3) those soft Nat voting defectors, along with the huge following Peters is getting in the provinces ensure huge bargaining capacity. This counters the moves by the Greens and the Maori party forming a secret bloc to cancel numerical advantage that Peters would have in forming a coalition with Labour.

    4) Peters surmised that the Greens and the Maori party may have had private talks, – as both are quite amenable in many ways. So in order to neutralize that potential bloc, – he attacks the very foundation the Maori party needs to stay in parliament , – the Maori electorates , – and weakens competitors in negotiations with both National and Labour in one fell swoop.

    5) Peters knows who his loyal support base is. He knows they will understand his tactics and wont abandon him . He also knows that the Maori seats issue is a throwaway issue. But it can be used to lure the soft right swing voter and bolster his bargaining with either National or Labour and also get rid of any small party’s that could compromise his demands in any coalition government formed after September 3rd.

    That is why he had both a protagonist ( Paraone ) and an antagonist (himself – Peters) when announcing these policy’s. It is along these lines that the ‘cutting parliament numbers’ has been forward as well… it serves a dual purpose.

    Winston Peters remains one of our most brilliant , seasoned and experienced politicians in modern times. And yet he is consistently underestimated by less longstanding and experienced politicians. He is a nationalist , and he has never changed his stance on opposing neo liberalism.

    There are very few in parliament today who can come anywhere near matching his strategic and tactical brilliance.

    Even John Key was afraid of him.

Comments are closed.