As we have seen in the last few weeks there have been a number of projects being tried to get the freedom voice into parliament. One is to go it alone as an individual brand and the other is to unite as one voice.
I have mentioned the benefits of each project in a previous article. However, I would like to propose another possible solution: a ‘shadow coalition’ in which the parties keep their identities but come to a confidence and supply agreement as to how they can present an alternative to the ones currently in Parliament.
This confidence and supply agreement could be made if all parties agreed on key values of freedom and democracy and that each could maintain its own policy on other social issues. In fact, one of the freedom parties in Canada has even taken the position of allowing their individual members to make their own minds up on some moral issues (something for the parties to consider).
It’s also quite possible as part of this shadow coalition to agree on specific portfolios for each of the prospective candidates, as in a traditional confidence and supply agreement among those wanting to form a government. In this way the coalition’s most effective spokespeople can point out the deficiencies of the parties currently in Parliament. Every candidate brings something to the public square due to their diversity of backgrounds. Not every party has to have a position on every issues. Some issues are more relevant to some areas of New Zealand than others. This is to be expected from the rural/urban divide – that each area will have house specific sectors of society and therefore will have different concerns. Which is perhaps why I look forward to seeing the return of the geographic representative party rather than the nationwide party.
This agreement could also entail an agreement that the different parties not contest the same electorates when campaigning. Each party could choose a specific region to campaign in. Informally, each of the parties could endorse each other’s candidates, encouraging people to vote for the person standing in another electorate for the coalition.
I would also like to add that the freedom movement includes a diverse set of skills. Some of the groups could continue their work as activists while allowing others who have political experience and expertise to campaign. Instead of the freedom movement focussing on one thing at a time, I believe it is possible for them to maintain multiple approaches: protesting, community theatre, offering support, and political campaigning.
I offer this possible solution for the freedom parties to consider, because I want to preserve the unity of the movement while preserving the individual identities of each of the different groups that make up the community.
