Certain happenings over the last few weeks on reflection make for interesting suppositions leading up to this years election in relation to the Labour and New Zealand First relationship.
Perhaps the first thing to comment on is the current investigation by the SFO into donations to the NZ First Foundation. While we await the outcome, it is of interest to compare leadership styles to when a similar situation arose with Winston Peters during the Clark Government of 2008. The day after the SFO started an investigation into NZ First donations, Clark and Peters met and he agreed to stand down as a Minister. Fast forward to this year and Winston Peters is refusing to do any such thing. He says his reason for not doing so is that, in 2008, the SFO were investigating himself, not the Party. Splitting hairs maybe?
If he is correct and that is indeed the difference, then there is another stark difference and that is the leadership style of the two Prime Ministers involved. Helen Clark, like John Key, ran the Government more like a company with the Cabinet as the Board of Directors. There was no room for any whiff of trouble and if it appeared it was swiftly dealt with. This is certainly not the case with the current Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who could no more run a company than wrap fish and chips. There is no meeting with Winston and therefore no need for him to stand aside.
According to Matthew Hooton, who says that this is the most hopeless Government in the country’s history, a fact hard to argue against, he disagrees that Jacinda Ardern would be unable to sack Shane Jones for his Indian remarks if she wanted to. He says the Cabinet Manual rules even allow her to sack Winston Peters, although this would cause political ructions. I can imagine, therefore, the reason she would not approach Peters regarding Jones. It is all too obvious his comments are politically motivated and aimed at the domestic market. When you’re Minister in a party of 3% or 4%, I suppose any publicity is good publicity.
Ardern’s appeal to voters to do her dirty work for her in respect of Jones at the ballot box is quite telling on her coalition partner. Chris Trotter muses over Labour’s relationship with NZ First between now and the election and asks if there is time to repair it. History proves this is the perennial problem of coalescing with Winston Peters. On the one hand he can be a good handbrake but on the other he is problematic. Trotter also asks, with the Greens hovering around the 5% mark and normally doing worse at the election than polls suggest, can Ardern afford to cut ties with NZ First? The plain fact is that Peters has the upper hand and both he and Jones know it.
There are many variables at play here but, throwing all the cards in the air, the joker in the pack could yet turn out to be Bridges and the National Party along with ACT.
If you enjoyed this BFD article please consider sharing it with your friends.
