liberation

[NZ First party history] 23: Henare sacking

After the 1996 general election, Tau Henare’s position as deputy leader continued to be precarious – in particular because of his terse relationship with Peters. The eventual firing of Henare was not so much an issue of personalities, but one that was representative of the increasing breakdown between the Maori and Pakeha factions. [Read more below]

Does political advertising work?

Does political advertising work? Governments and political parties spend millions of dollars on paid advertising, but the results are often of dubious effect. As I’ve pointed out in previous posts, there doesn’t seem to be any correlation between how much a political party spends on advertising and how many votes they obtain (see here, here, here, here, here, here and here). The 2008 mega-professional and expensive Green Party campaign was yet another example of this in action. The party’s taxpayer-funded Buy Kiwi Made advertising campaign has also been a significant failure. [Read more below]

Trotter on the left's wish for “heightened contradictions”

Chris Trotter writes his recent weekly syndicated newspaper column about the socialist left's approach to National's election win. Those on the left that aren't used to Trotter's provocations would be best not to read any further, as they might find themselves rather outraged. As usual, when Trotter deals with anything to the left of Labour, he is rather provocative. The picture he paints of the socialist left is rather inaccurate and based on the outdated idea - if indeed it was ever true - that socialists prefer to see rightwing political parties in power because by their more blatant anti-worker programme of government they bring about some sort of "heightened contradictions" through their intensified class oppression. Yet rather than wishing for any sort of “heightened contradictions” under National, the socialist left are probably thinking to themselves: 'It's better to have National stabbing you in the front than to have Labour stabbing you in the back’ [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 22: Early internal dissent

During its early years New Zealand First had a large number of members resigning, and number of other internal party disputes. In particular, the party organisation continued to be unstable. According to Laugesen, writing in 1997, 'Of NZF's original management committee of seven, only Mr Woolerton and Mr Peters are still members, let alone actively involved in the party' (Laugesen, 31 Aug 1997: p.C2). The dissenting ex-members all left the party. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 21: The Maori faction

The existence and potential future of the Maori faction within New Zealand First was obviously one of the more interesting developments in the party during the 1990s. Because NZ First lacked the alignments or institutional ties to powerful social, ethnic or economic forces outside of Parliament, it was relatively easy for the Maori faction to assert some control within the party and build up an effective powerbase. [Read more below]

Is the NZ left naive or paranoid?

In terms of covert police surveillance of civil society and its political participation, the New Zealand left often displays extremes of either naivety or paranoia, and unfortunately little in between. In the contemporary case of "leftwing activist" police informant Rob Gilchrist, the left appears to have been incredibly naive. [Read more below]

Who runs New Zealand in 2008?

The question of who runs New Zealand is infrequently examined in the media (or even that much in our universities), but it obviously deserves the attention of anyone interested in understanding politics or wanting any kind of social change. Fortunately, for the last five years the Listener has been publishing its annual Power List in an attempt to do just this. Although it’s always more journalistic and celebratory than analytical and critical, the exercise does nonetheless always shine a light on the people involved in running New Zealand. And it indicates some significant trends. This year there has been some major changes to the list, partly representing the fact that the outgoing Labour Government’s favoured businesspeople, ‘thinkers’ and lobbyists are now out in the cold as a change of government brings about different influences, but also because the Listener probably wants to dazzle us with new faces that are supposedly wielding great undiscovered power. This blog post offers a critical summary of, and commentary on, the Listener’s list. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 20: Post-1996 identity, strategy and factions

New Zealand First’s decline inevitably led to a large degree of friction and infighting within the party. The firing of Neil Kirton is one example. Other friction included the resignation of Jenny Bloxham as party vice president after she fell out publicly with party president Doug Woolerton and whip Ron Mark. With such strong factions within the party, it was hardly surprising that there was friction. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 19: Decline in popularity

The post-1996 coalition combination of National and New Zealand First was always going to be a fraught affair due to the very different ideological and personality factors of the two parties. Because NZ First based its credibility on its promise that it would get rid of National, much of that credibility was immediately lost after they signed up to the National Party. That immediately alienated a huge number of supporters. But the party’s hold on supporters was irretrievably ended by the seemingly endless troubles and scandals that occurred in the first 18 months in government; ‘the Tuku Morgan affair, the Henare swagger, the McDonald shopping trip, the Banks dustup, the Bloxham resignation, the "neutered Treasury poodle" epithets, the 3 percent poll ratings, the Winebox and Cushing debacles’ (Laws, 16 Dec 1997: p.6). [Read more below]

Election analysis from the left

There’s been very little insightful or interesting analysis of the New Zealand general election results from the left of the political spectrum. This is partly because much of the left is so strongly tied to either the Labour Party or the Greens – both losers in the election.  However, John Braddock’s socialist analysis is fairly solid. Writing on the World Socialist Website, Braddock’s article Labour government dumped in New Zealand elections is a hard-hitting explanation of Labour’s loss, which he explains as a clear ‘clear repudiation of Labour and its pro-business orientation by significant layers of the working class’. [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 18: People’s Treasurer or Treasury Poodle?

As the Treasurer in the National-NZ First coalition government, Winston Peters dubbed himself ‘The Peoples’ Treasurer’. Virtually all commentators, however, preferred the title of ‘The Treasury Poodle’. There is no doubt that, upon becoming part of the government, New Zealand First had to accept further elements of the new economic orthodoxy. While of course compromises have to be made in any coalition, ‘Peters in his role as Treasurer has not just compromised, he has become an enthusiastic convert to the National economic world view' (Laugesen, 15 Feb 1998: p.F1-2). Peters' role as Treasurer underlined NZ First’s further shifts to the right in economic ideology. His decision to take this portfolio was also a serious error for the party [Read more below]

[NZ First party history] 17: The 1996 coalition decision

The 1996 election result gave New Zealand First the balance of power and therefore the choice between putting Labour or National into office. On 10 December, after protracted negotiations with both parties, Peters informed the country that NZ First had chosen National. The gamble to go with National was based upon policy concessions, leadership ambition, and protecting the NZ First brand. But because the party had been so adamant about their refusal to work with National after the election, the decision to then go with National damaged both the party and the electoral system. It also confirmed that the basic ideological flavour of the NZ First was indeed conservative and not – as commentators and voters had perceived it to be – left-of-centre. Moreover it indicated that the party was not founded upon a coherent and stable philosophy. [Read more below]