Many reading this will be old enough to remember the Herman’s Hermits song, “She’s a Must to Avoid”. That is how the leader of the Opportunity Party, Qiulae Wong, presented in last weekend’s Q+A interview with Jack Tame. Mr Tame, who does not often inspire me, deserves credit for pushing to get to the bottom of what Opportunity stands for. This was no easy task, as Wong has an unflappable streak, where every criticism or query is met with a smile and is seamlessly brushed away. The interviewer therefore has to dig deep and press for answers that the audience wants. Tame’s ‘dog with a bone’ technique often frustrates me, but on this occasion it was necessary.
It seems to me the Opportunity Party is made up of youngish to middle-aged liberals who are, if not ideologues, then certainly idealists. These are the same types who are, probably unintentionally, destroying the National Party. A good example of an ideologue is Christopher Luxon. He is a person who believes strongly in a particular set of ideas or political principles and follows them without compromise. As an ideologue, he refuses to listen to other points of view or change his mind, even when faced with facts that prove him wrong. He is also ‘A Must to Avoid’.
The Q+A interview showed Opportunity as akin to a mad woman’s breakfast – i.e., all over the place. Tame spent a fair amount of time trying to dissect the party’s policy that those living overseas for five years or more will not qualify for the party’s proposed citizens income but they would qualify for paying the proposed higher tax rate. Tame said this would cost those returning from overseas and renting an extra $17,000 per year and those who bought a house an extra $27,000. He asked “Why would anyone come back”. That was brushed aside by a claim that other policies such as student loan forgiveness would balance it out. So take with one hand to give with the other.
Tame asked her about the party wanting to restrict party donations to $30,000 or less. He pointed out that Opportunity was currently accepting donations many times larger than that. The reply was the party was simply playing by the current rules so as not to disadvantage themselves in their quest to enter parliament. One can see the logic but such blatant hypocrisy is straight out of the left-wing playbook. The policy itself reeks of left-wing thinking, where democratic liberties are stamped upon. The right get more in donations than the left and we can’t have that, can we? Classic left-wing policy of envy.
In an interview with RNZ in June, Wong said she saw Opportunity as replacing New Zealand First as kingmaker. She believes NZF stands for division and they use division to get votes. I suggest she seeks an urgent appointment with Winston to get herself educated. His party, above all others, stands for one nation, one people. New Zealand First, she says, wants to take New Zealand back to what it once was while she is looking to the future. She needs a history lesson as well. What this country once was, was a jolly sight better than what it is today. Sometimes you have to go backward somewhat in order to go forward.
Wong wants to negotiate with the party that gets the largest number of votes. If that is a party on the right, she’ll be out of luck because Luxon wants nothing to do with her. Neither do Seymour or Peters. That puts a lie to her claim of being a centrist party. Their policies, e.g., a land tax, are firmly attached to the left side of the political divide.
Heather du Plessis Allan on Newstalk ZB described the Q+A interview as not far off a train wreck. Helen Clark also described it in such terms. Heather is of the opinion Opportunity might have peaked. I tend to agree. I very much doubt they will meet the five per cent threshold. The other option is Wong wins in Mt Albert. That, in my view, is more of a possibility than a probability. I predict Labour will win the seat.
To finish on a broader note, liberal politicians are doing damage to the conservative right. They do not belong on the right, but on the left.
As for Qiulae Wong, she’s a must to avoid – a complete impossibility. You can take it from me.
