Shout to the TOP

There's a new kingmaker in town.

I was half in mind, I was half in need
And as the rain came down
I dropped to my knees, and I prayed
I said, "Oh heavenly thing, please cleanse my soul
I've seen all on offer, and I'm not impressed at all"

Songwriter: Paul Weller.

---

This morning on Breakfast, Tova was lighthearted, as she often is right before biting the head off her prey, and joked that the country was sick of Chrises.

That followed last night’s 1 News poll, which showed the two major parties on their lowest combined vote since our very first MMP election in 1996, a full thirty years ago. The year I finished Uni, started my first graduate role developing software to label blood tests, and met my wife Fi. John Major was the UK PM, and Bill Clinton was in the Oval Office. It feels like a long time ago.

Some of the leaders from that time are well known; others drift into history. There was Clark, of course, dear Helen, so strong and so human. I had no idea at the time what a remarkable person she was. Jim Bolger, the old spud who softened in later life, saw the wrongs of neoliberalism, but in the 90s oversaw a devastating attack on the country’s most vulnerable at the hands of Shipley and Richardson.

The late Jim Anderton, who had the courage to walk away from Douglas’s Labour Party, as Roger inspired Ruth with an all-out attack on egalitarian NZ. Richard Prebble, as mad then as his columns are now, and Clive Matthewson of United, an earlier attempt to create a centrist party that would work with either side, but which rapidly morphed into Peter Dunne providing an extra vote for National.

There was one more, of course, not departed nor lamented, who has anointed most of our Prime Ministers since.

There are three certainties in life: death, taxes, and Winston Peters.

At the 1996 election, National and Labour attracted a combined total of just 65%, with one in three Kiwis taking advantage of proportional representation to vote for a minor party. Not dissimilar to last night’s poll:

The poll was completed a week ago, prior to National’s KiwiSaver announcement or the release of the Green Party’s tax policies.

It showed a win to the left, although that was based on a fairly large assumption that Te Pāti Māori would win all of their current seats. Hardly a foregone conclusion, as tight competition is likely in a number of the Māori electorates from Labour as well as from the Greens, with the formidable Tania Waikato in Waiariki.

There were winners: the Greens and NZ First, and losers: ACT, but the big story was undeniably The Opportunity Party’s 4.6%. It was the first time TOP had polled above 3.5% in this election cycle with any polling organisation other than Roy Morgan, and they were on the cusp of entering parliament.

I’ve previously written about the risks of voting TOP, namely the possibility that they fall short of 5% and the uncertainty over whether a vote for them would lead to a softer coalition with TOP as a handbrake or to a progressive government with the opposition.

Hipkins, Q, and Luxon. Image 1 News.

Part of me thinks it would be good to have TOP in parliament. As I’ve said all along, I really like their policies. But there is a lingering nervousness.

If TOP had made it above 5% in last night’s poll, they would have held the balance of power and had a major say in who our next government would be. I don’t much like the idea of introducing another Kingmaker, even though I like TOP’s policies. Leader Q has said they will announce bottom lines before the election, which is good, but I find it hard to imagine they’ve gone to all this trouble only to sit on the cross benches, voting on legislation on a case-by-case basis.

Here is a clip showing the responses of the other parties to the possibility of TOP joining them:

I did enjoy Marama Davidson saying, “Their policies are pretty awesome; they sort of look like Greens.” I can well imagine the two parties working productively together should such an arrangement eventuate.

Tova invited Q onto the Breakfast programme, saying that Mr Peters could be out of a job as a kingmaker, which probably earned TOP a few more votes, because, for the love of god, how many of us have had enough of Winston already? Q was warm, relaxed, and spoke clearly, a performance our PM can only dream of.

She was open about past near misses, with TOP coming close but people deciding at the last minute not to risk it. What was different this time, she said, was the membership numbers, the level of media coverage, and the donations.

I felt a bit of sympathy for her, firstly because it must be the hundredth time she’s been asked that question, and secondly because it’s really hard to get a new party into parliament, especially without an electorate seat to give it a foot in the door. In my view, that 5% threshold should be reduced to no more than 3%.

Asked about the two Chrises, Q said there was distrust in both our major parties' ability to fix the issues, which I think is a fair reflection of where we’re at. She said TOP were pragmatic and in the middle but also wanted to see bold change, which seemed contradictory to me.

She encouraged voters to look at the policies a party is putting on the table and the approach it's bringing to politics, and to vote based on that. Pretty simple really.

Tova indicated that that was all very nice, but the reality was that if TOP entered parliament, they would anoint either a left- or right-wing PM. Q shifted her answer to 2023 and said she thought it was a shame that National and the Greens had ruled each other out, and that things might have been different.

I was surprised by that, given that the two parties are diametrically opposed on almost every issue, and, besides, the way the Green Party works means that members must approve any coalition arrangement. It felt like Q was being positive, but also avoiding the question.

Asked about the possibility of a left-wing coalition and tax reform, Q indicated that it was important to have agreement from the public, which again sounds good, but there is so much misinformation on the topic that it seems unlikely to me. I also wondered whether those who have attacked the Green Party’s Wealth Tax would now have a go at TOP’s Land Tax as they stick their head above the parapet.

Q indicated that TOP was not interested in a pre-election deal, as it would run counter to their role in the centre and keeping either side honest.

They moved to quick-fire questions. TOP would not support the LNG facility, which makes no sense, so that was good to hear; on the other hand, she was not supportive of reinstating the oil and gas ban, although she somewhat preserved the party’s climate credentials by agreeing that agricultural emissions should be considered.

I was pleased to hear an unequivocal “yes” in response to the question of reinstating fair pay agreements.

It was a good interview, but there will be tougher ones ahead. TOP certainly have the ideas to bring to parliament; my remaining concern is that I really want to see this coalition go, and I’m not sure whether TOP getting there will make that more or less likely, or what impact they would have on the next government.

Still, if there is to be a Kingmaker, I would far rather it be a level-headed, polite, and liberal person like Q than Drunkle Winston once again.

Have a great day, folks; it’s pretty wet here in Tamaki Makaurau. I hope it’s not too bad where you are.

Ngā mihi,
Nick.

To end today, here is Paul Weller with Shout To The Top.