liberation

Trotter on social democracy’s political degeneration

Chris Trotter is returning to form. After the death of his strangely beloved ‘social democratic’ Labour Government, he’s been in a much more reflective and insightful mood (rather than his previous phase of agit-prop defence of ‘lesser evilism’). In this week’s Independent Financial Review column he reflects on the political degeneration of what currently passes for social democracy. He shows how the Labour Party – and the much of the wider left in NZ politics – has a deeply problematic relationship with the New Zealand working class. Essentially Labour now sees workers as victims to manage rather than as a positive political force with the tremendous potential to change society. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 16: The 1996 election, mismanagement & internal discontent

The 1996 election was relatively successful for New Zealand First. But this was despite a myriad of internal problems occurring, including discontent and factious rivalries inside the party, a malfunctioning parliamentary unit, controversy over the creation of the party list, and a relatively uncoordinated campaign strategy. [Read more below]

NZ First was advantaged in the 1996 general election by the political culture shift occurring where, as Michael Laws has put it, 'The petty demands of television have also obliged political parties to abandon any attempt at rational and constructive policy debate, and to engage instead in "presidential-style" campaigns centred on the party leader' (Laws, 1998: p.345). This suited a party which was clearly arranged around its charismatic leader and mainly populist campaigns.

[NZ First party history] 15: The shambolic party organisation

The New Zealand First party organisation continued to be directed from its parliamentary offices. Therefore for those close to the party it had little appearance of a democratic mass party. Instead it was more akin to a disorganized fiefdom for its leader. [Read more below]

 

[NZ First party history] 14: The Anti-immigration surge

Prior to New Zealand First moving right-wards in its economic policy during 1996, it also began to give more emphasis to the more socially conservative or right-wing policies and stances it held. In particular, Winston Peters revitalised NZ First’s electoral prospects in early 1996 by opening up a debate about immigration with his views that the number of immigrants to New Zealand needed to be further restricted. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 13: Shifting to the right

Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s Winston Peters had positioned himself as a staunch opponent of free-market economic reform. Then during the 1993-96 parliamentary term there were signs that he was shifting in his position. It became very obvious that New Zealand First's economic policy proposed only minor changes to government economic policy. This was in sharp contrast with the impression that Peters had previously given, that the economic reforms of the last 12 years have been totally wrong and that they therefore required to be substantially overturned. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 12: The influence of Michael Laws

Upon becoming a New Zealand First MP, Michael Laws became Winston Peters’ chief adviser, reorganising the Parliamentary office, and generally managing events and the party direction. Laws grew to hold a status as “the man behind Peters”. Party insiders made claims much like those made by Labour Party insiders about the influence of Margaret Pope over David Lange and about Heather Simpson’s influence over her boss Helen Clark. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 11: The new defecting MPs

As the party system fragmented during the parliamentary term of 1993-96, NZ First recruited a further three MPs: Michael Laws and Peter McCardle from National, and Jack Elder from Labour. NZ First was not necessarily the first choice of a new political home for any of the three defectors. Before swapping to NZ First they had all shown an interest in the then impending development of a new centre party involving Mike Moore. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 10: Changing directions

The election result in 1993 was largely a defeat for the party – as it came a distant fourth in the contest and did not breakout of single figures in their voting percentage. Election defeats generally bring about re-evaluations of party direction and thus the possibility of substantial policy and identity transformations. After 1993 this was true for NZ First, and Peters seemed to be struggling for direction. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 9: Tau Henare and the Maori faction

The most notable outcome of the 1993 general election for NZ First was the election of Tau Henare in the seat of Northern Maori. Henare had initially sought to stand for the Alliance in the seat – as he had become involved in politics through Alliance constituency party Mana Motuhake - but failed to be considered for the nomination over Matt Rata. Henare thus stood instead for NZ First. Being the great grandson of a former Reform party MP for the electorate Taurekareka (Tau) Henare (and also a nephew of Sir James Henare), Tau Henare hence had highly respected Maori surname and thus a very strong chance of winning the seat, no matter which party he represented. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 8: Initial failure & the 1993 election

After a brief honeymoon following its launch in 1993, NZ First failed to fulfill the widespread expectations that it was going to be a major player in the party system. In its first electoral venture it performed relatively poorly. [Read more below]
 

[NZ First party history] 7: Conservative and populist social ideology

While the leftwing label put that was put on many of NZ First’s early economic positions is debatable, the party’s positioning on many other issues has clearly been very socially conservative. For example, NZ First’s early positions on social issues, such as immigration, race-relations and gender relations, clearly cast it as a conservative party – in the tradition of Muldoon. [Read more below]

Once were farmers… but now the political class are lawyers

When the 4th National Government came to power in 1990, the makeup of its Cabinet indicated that the National Party was still tied to its rural roots. Thirteen former farmers were appointed to the twenty-MP cabinet, together with a further three MPs from rural or provincial areas, while there was only one MP included from a metropolitan Auckland seat. The makeup of the new 5th National Government suggests that the party has qualitatively changed. In stark contrast to the old 1990s rural-based Bolger Cabinet, lawyers now outnumber farmers 8 to 2 in the Key Cabinet. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 6: Centrist economic ideology

It’s becoming increasingly problematic to try to squeeze New Zealand’s political parties into an ideological left-right analytical framework, and this is especially the case with NZ First. Right from the launch of NZ First, most political commentators and voters mistook the party’s disgruntlement with the new political order as indicating the essentially leftwing nature of NZ First. Its basic economic framework – greater social spending, government intervention and economic nationalism – appeared to align the party with Labour and the Alliance, while its Maori candidates tended to be very ‘pro-treaty’, which is a political position that is usually thought of as being leftwing. The leftwing nature of many of NZ First’s early ‘leftwing’ economic positions are very debatable, but essentially the new party was economically centrist [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 5: The party organisation

Peters and his supporters had done little to establish any sort of organisation prior to the public launch of NZ First and it was some time before any elections were held for the position of party office bearers. In the meantime, Peters appointed a management committee to oversee the administration of the Party until such time as elections could be held. This six-person interim committee basically ran the party and selected all the candidates for the 1993 general election (Hames, 1995: p.194). [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 4: The launch

The fact that NZ First was born in a hurry had important ramifications for the subsequent development of the party. In a matter of months, a party organisation had to be formed, policy developed, candidates selected and a general election fought. These formidable tasks were only ever partially achieved. The start-up was generally viewed as having been botched-up, as everything before and after the launch seemed to be mishandled. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 3: Negotiations with the Alliance

After leaving the National Party it was entirely inevitable that Peters would establish his own political party. For some time there appeared to be a chance that he would join the Alliance. In December 1991, Peters was approached by the Alliance to join their coalition. Significantly, the approach came with the offer of the leadership of the Alliance. [Read more below]
 

[NZ First party history] 2: Fourth National Govt & expulsion

The National Party’s 1990 general election campaign and manifesto essentially represented a hybrid between the Winston Peters and Ruth Richardson factions. At the same time that the party promised some sort of continuation of Rogernomics-style economic management, it also posed reassuringly as the party of stability and integrity with policies such as its promise to halve unemployment by 1993. Therefore, while Peters’ own economic ideology was now clearly out of step with that of the leadership, it was not necessarily inconsistent with the party’s election campaign. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 1: Origins

In light of the defeat of New Zealand First at the recent general election, the following blog post series focuses on the history of the party. Little academic research has been published on the Winston Peters phenomenon, despite the fact that he and his party have been central to parliamentary politics in New Zealand since the 1980s. This series – which focuses on the early history of the party – attempts to help fill this gap. This first post concentrates on the origins of the New Zealand First party, which can be traced back to the Muldoonist milieu in the National Party of the early-to-mid 1980s – both in personnel (the “Rob’s Mob” party members and the centrist MP Winston Peters) and ideology (economic and populist nationalism). This milieu was more characterised by its adherence to the ideology and political style of Muldoon than it was typical of the National Party tradition. [Read more below]

Have the Greens sold their soul?

Political advertising, according to Simon Carr, ‘combines all the things voters most dislike about politics and about advertising – slick, costly, boastful and almost certainly untrue’. This is possibly the case with the Green Party’s 2008 billboard and television advertising campaign, which is one of the most vacuous we’ve seen in New Zealand politics, and a sign that in this year’s campaign the Greens have given up all pretence of being anything other than an empty electoral-professional party of office-seeking politicians. The party used to abhor the commodification of politics, and its MPs used to criticise other parties for their use of marketers to sell party votes as if they are just another product like a box of soap powder on the supermarket shelf. But the new business-like marketing management-driven advertising campaign of the Greens suggests that the party has not merely lost its soul, but is actively selling off its soul. This professionalisation is indicative of a Green Party that is itself become more populist, pragmatic and vacuous. While this market-oriented professionalisation is perhaps most evident in the campaign of the Green Party, it is actually a trend that is strongly present throughout all the parliamentary parties fighting the 2008 general election campaign. Therefore rather than cover the whole election campaign, this in-depth blog post seeks to draw out the nature of the 2008 election using the Greens as a case study of modern hollow politics. [Read more below]