NZ Politics Daily - 21 February (liberation)

The following blog post, highlights the best of political reporting, analysis and comment in New Zealand politics.

The most interesting political news and commentary from the last few days has probably been on the issue of John Key and National’s political management – especially over the BMWs and their orientation to those in poverty. Anthony Hubbard had a good column in the Sunday Star Times, suggesting that due to the political (mis)management, the prime minister ‘is wide open to the charge that he's a plutocrat’, and ‘Key's grin was National's greatest asset and enabled him to reach out to the workers as well as National's middle class. But now the government is moving Right and Key's friendliness collides with his policies’ (see: Beemers but not smilers). The NZ Herald also had a strong editorial on the matter (see: Flippant line bad look for Key), highlighting the fact that Key failed the ‘leadership test’, and is starting to show ‘the face’ of ‘a man who didn't give a stuff what people thought’: ‘We don't expect Key to read every report that comes through his office. But what we do expect from a Prime Minister is leadership. And in this matter Key's leadership has been shown to be woefully wanting’. [For further highlights of NZ Politics Daily - read more below]

But writing in Saturdays’ Herald, John Armstrong (pictured on the right) has been the most insightful. Part of his column (Key in for cruisy ride over a bumpy road) is worth quoting at length. He questions whether public opposition to National’s proposed partial privatisation of state assets is really that deep and significant, and brings in some useful political science theory to explain what issues are useful in differentiating political parties and encouraging partisanship:

Labour has been pushing the issue hard, so it will take considerable heart from that result. The question is, how much of an issue is it really? National claims its private polling is picking up a far more positive reaction. It believes Labour is misreading the depth of the opposition. This is Labour's conundrum. The electorate is like a giant sponge which, without much fuss, soaks up whatever Key and National throws at it - good or bad. Labour is struggling to find salient, vote-shifting issues. The reason can be found in ground-breaking analysis by a couple of British political scientists in the 1960s. They found that for an issue to have a strong effect on voting behaviour, it must meet three conditions. The two major parties must have clearly differing policies. Public opinion must be skewed heavily one way or the other. And people must feel strongly about the issue. Winston Peters' campaign against Asian immigration in the 1990s is the classic example. New Zealand First was a lone voice. Public opinion was skewed against more Asians entering the country. And people were passionate in their opposition to that. When it comes to partial privatisation, Labour's opposition and the skewed findings of the TV3 poll meet the first two conditions of "saliency". But there is little sign of the public getting angry. Take another vexed question with which National has been grappling - the foreshore and seabed. Here opinion is highly skewed at the extremes - the Coastal Coalition claims National is giving large stretches of the coastline to Maori, while Maori say the tests for securing customary title are too tough. Although slightly uneasy, the bulk of Pakeha voters are also confused by the complexities and simply want the matter to go away. What is termed "attitude formation" is therefore relatively low. There is another reason the issue has not flared to the extent it did in 2004. Though Labour now opposes National's legislation, the two parties aren't that far apart. Even the parties trying to milk the issue - Act and NZ First - have struggled to get traction. They are handicapped by the vociferous response from large chunks of Maoridom. The more Maori complain, the more confident the vast majority of Pakeha feel National has got it largely right. However, there is one issue on which Labour might yet gain traction - the seemingly ever-escalating cost of living. Public opinion is heavily skewed against price rises, especially when wage growth is so sluggish. Labour thinks National is vulnerable and is tailoring policies - such as removing GST on fresh fruit and vegetables - to exploit that. Tellingly, National has reacted with an investigation into the price of milk. But National believes Labour is pitching its policies and its messages generally too far down the income scale. There is surprise Phil Goff is not moving Labour more to the right to capture the political centre. That belief was reinforced by Gillard's presence. Goff tried to claim the leader of the Australian Labor Party as a kindred spirit. In fact, she is possibly further to the right than Key. For now, however, Goff may be reinforcing Labour's core vote before targeting middle New Zealand, which is starting to hurt.

With welfare reform about to hit the public agenda this week, there’s been a few useful articles published on poverty, inequality and welfare issues. The Sunday Star Times published two in-depth features: Imogen Neale’s Hungry for cheaper food and Kim Knight’s Hunger pains. According to Knight, ‘here's a phrase you're about to hear more often: "Food insecurity – the limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods, or the limited ability to acquire acceptable foods in a socially acceptable way."’ Apparently, ‘Back in 1997, the country's first National Nutrition Survey found almost 30% of our households experienced a degree of food insecurity. Last year, a smaller research project pushed that figure up to 40%.’ Also she reports, ‘Latest figures from the Salvation Army showed a 16% increase in demand across its network of 48 foodbanks last year’.

With the Welfare Working Group’s report about to come out, Tracy Watkin reports that the Salvation Army fears that the new welfare proposals are likely to be a 'defining moment' in NZ history. And Simon Collins has a similar article entitled Bombshell on way for beneficiaries – reporting that ‘Former Green MP Sue Bradford, who now leads a new group called Auckland Action Against Poverty, said the report was shaping up to make the 1991 benefit cuts look like "chicken feed" in terms of their impact on present and future beneficiaries’.

John Hartevelt is now the political columnist for the Sunday Star Times, and yesterday, he argued that Bill English is about to step up and play a much more visible and active role in governance:

‘WITNESS: THE rebirth of a politician. This guy was getting isolated… Key backs himself to execute the policy arguments, especially for partial asset sales, but he does not intend to do it alone. Gerry Brownlee is in fine fettle, but has plenty on his plate already. Steven Joyce is also an able option, but he could not be seen to be overtly stealing English's thunder, on top of everything else he already does… So English simply had to burst out of the blocks. It started late last year, when he was oddly chosen to front the announcement of a constitutional review. Then, in the New Year, he got in early for a rev-up session with the government's team of press secretaries. In the past, he has briefed them ahead of the Budget, but this year he was in there in January, hammering home the government's election year messages. English now strides towards the waiting cameras with a grin across his face. He is clocking up a lot more airtime on radio and filling more column centimetres in the papers. It's no coincidence…. This week, he will deliver a speech outlining more plans for reform in the state sector. In the coming weeks and months, he'll collect up some ideas from the Savings Working Group and tie a ribbon around them for the May Budget. Before then, English will be in your face’.

There’s been quite a bit of analysis and news over the last few days about the various fledgling new and old minor parties.

The Herald on Sunday reported that NZ's still first for Winston Peters, in which Peters claimed in rather conspiratorial terms, that ‘the Government has pestered him to accept an overseas ambassadorship - to get him out of politics and out of the country’. Murray McCully was apparently behind it all, but ‘The Government denied the claim. McCully said yesterday that it was "fiction".’.

The New Citizen Party is profiled in the Herald, as it is launched itself in the Botany by-election. Apparently it is ‘well-financed’ involving ‘A group of Chinese immigrants’, including ‘man who was behind the failed Crafar farm bid, Jack Chen’. Furthermore, ‘Eru Thompson, a political veteran of the Maori Party, has been hired by the New Citizen Party to manage its campaign for the March 5 byelection. "One of the major reasons I'm working with them is that they are going to work with the Maori Party," Thompson said. "Maori and Asians have always been minorities and we have never, ever had the power to make decision by ourselves."’

Matt McCarten has a column entitled Far right sneaked new party in under radar, but actually has more interesting information about the prospects of a New Left Party – which doesn’t appear to be that likely. McCarten says that he’s had chats with people like Sue Bradford and ‘cultural firebrand "Bomber" Bradbury’, but the key line of the article is this: ‘My only caution is whether this year there's enough other staunchies out there. If there was I'd have no hesitation in helping’ – i.e. McCarten doesn’t really see that there is enough active demand for a party at the moment, and that he’s not about to play more than a ‘helping’ hand in such a party should it eventuate. McCarten also surveys the other possible parties for the left to vote for, commenting that ‘In terms of the current players, Labour has undoubtedly rebranded itself as a progressive social democratic party. And if you don't mind accepting unfettered capitalism and keeping the fundamentals of Rogernomics then that's the party for you’. He also nicely sums up what is happening in the Maori Party: ‘Superficially it's about whether Hone Harawira will behave himself or not. But it's actually more serious than that. It's a clear case of class politics crashing into Maori politics. Can a party really be primarily about ethnicity and ignore class politics? It cannot.’

Meanwhile although the Maori Party currently has a ban on its members talking to the media about the Hone Harawira disciplinary action, it seems that the leadership are getting around this by leaking documents – hence Claire Trevett has scoop today: Rebel MP 'wanted job as a minister' based on the leaked ‘confidential statement by caucus colleague Te Ururoa Flavell’. In this, Flavell questions Harawira’s integrity and sincerity:

In his submission to today's disciplinary committee hearing against Mr Harawira, obtained by the Herald, Mr Flavell said both he and the Te Tai Tokerau MP were prepared to take up ministerial positions - belying Mr Harawira's recent strong criticisms of his party for staying in the coalition. "Put it this way: If he was to have received a ministerial position, would he still be writing to criticise the relationship? Answer: I doubt it."… Mr Flavell revealed Mr Harawira's ministerial hopes to counter the MP's claims that the party had gone off the rails and sold its people out by dealing with National. Mr Flavell was also scathing about Mr Harawira's criticism of National as "anti-worker" and "anti-environment," saying the MP had had difficulties with his own staff and once told the caucus he did not believe in climate change and nobody would tell him to drive a smaller car. "So he champions the cause and yet abuses the cause as he feels."

Ngati Porou is apparently gearing up work out how to use its new $110 million treaty settlement – see Yvonne Tahana report, Greedy 'sharks' circling Ngati Porou. In this we learn that Te Runanga o Ngati Porou is the ‘country's second largest iwi - with 72,000 – members’, already has ‘$50 million worth of forestry, farming, health and radio assets "frugally" built up from nothing since 1987’, and is ‘one of the largest employers’ in their region, with about 300 staff.

Also in the area of ethnicity politics, Karl du Fresne has written a provocative column in the Nelson Mail in which he ponders the negativity of Waitangi Day, and wonders why politicians keep going to Waitangi. His answer is that it’s all about elitism and political manoeuvring on the part of political parties:

The politicians’ attraction to Waitangi is harder to explain. Presumably it has something to do with the desire to ingratiate themselves (though they would doubtless prefer to say “express solidarity”) with Maori powerbrokers. This also explains the annual politicians’ pilgrimage to Ratana, which is now seen as marking the start of the political year. Certainly Key is keen to keep the Maori Party onside and therefore emphasise that National has succeeded in severing the historic link between Maori and the Labour Party. His government has granted open-door access to a powerful, non-elected Maori elite, the iwi leadership group, and is prepared to push through legislation that could give certain privileged tribes unprecedented rights over the foreshore and seabed that has traditionally belonged to us all.

The Sunday Star Times had two interesting items about the political use of social media. One reports on the use of Twitter – see: Political characters risk the twit factor. Apparently the top Twitter in Parliament, Tau Henare, tweets on average, 22 times a day. The article reports that ‘Fairfax IT writer Juha Saarinen (@juhasaarinen) speculates that this new "tyranny of openness" will end in tears for MPs’ because ‘Politicians need to learn not to confuse "friends", "fans" and "followers" with voters and supporters’. Furthermore, ‘Saarinen finds the behaviour of tweeters such as Henare and Curran bizarre and says the MPs, like many who say rash things online, could find it backfiring on them’.

FROM THE POLITICAL TWITTERSCAPE

Prime Minister John Key (16,441 followers and 618 tweets) @johnkeypm

Labour leader Phil Goff (2561 and 573 tweets)@philgoff

National MP Tau Henare (844 and 3951)@tauhenare

Labour MP Clare Curran (1020 and 3346)@clarecurranmp

National MP Melissa Lee (326 and 1358)@melissaleemp

Labour MP Jacinda Ardern (1494 and 679)@jacindaardern

National MP Stuart Nash (457 and 6130 @StuartNashMP

(Numbers recorded on Friday.)

Jonathan Marshall brings up the dangers of politician use of social media with his article, Red-faced over extremist Facebook entry. National’s Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi was found to have joined up to the Facebook group "I hate poor people". According to Bakshi: ‘"I never joined it. If by mistake someone has joined it, I will definitely remove it myself . . . if someone has done it on my behalf, I apologise."’

Also on the topic of campaigning, Derek Cheng reports that the candidates in the Botany by-election aren’t generally spending much money. However, National’s Jami-Lee Ross said he ‘was already making use of more than 50 billboards and flyers in English and Mandarin’. In contrast, ‘Rob Caithness, of the Join Australia Movement, is spending about $2000 on local newspaper advertising and some posters’ and ‘Independent candidate Wayne Young is broke and homeless, and his campaigning resources amount to a sticker on his car and a fluoro-coloured jacket with his name on it.’.

There’s been a fair bit of discussion in the blogosphere about the prospects of minor parties. For instance, Martyn Bradbury is still drumming up support of a New Left Party – see: How Chris Trotter just convinced me a New Left Party can happen. However, Chris Trotter replies with Bomber's "To Do" List.

Chris Trotter also blogs about sexual politics – with an interesting commentary about his participation on last week’s Media 7 tv show about the decline of Women’s Studies in NZ universities:

Prompted by the recent decision to cancel the Women’s Studies course at Victoria University, the producers of Media 7 were keen to examine the likely impact of its demise on the coverage of gender issues by the New Zealand media. But could they get anybody with a strong personal commitment to the teaching of Women’s Studies to appear on the show? Not on your Nelly! Sandra Coney and Sue Kedgely, founding mothers of Second Wave Feminism in New Zealand, declined. All the women in academia who were approached were unwilling to put their heads above the ivory parapet. Even the women at New Zealand’s premier feminist blogsite – The Hand Mirror– refused to participate.

Trotter gleefully reports that he, himself was the only one willing to come on the show and defend Women’s Studies courses. And he notes that ironically the other defender to appear was also a bloke: John Campbell.

Also on the topic of sexual politics, Wallace Chapman blogs about last week’s Backbencher show in which Chester Burrows created controversy:

The panel was lively and feisty; to be expected with the seasoned MPs we had on the bench. But the big call was National MP Chester Borrows saying he didn't think the proposed gay parade should be called the Hero parade because gay people aren't heroes in the same sense as say Willie Apiata are heroes. And what actually is heroic about someone walking down Queen Street in leather shorts singing YMCA…. But without putting my spin on the topic, I'll refer you to an 'open letter' that gay comedian Philip Patston wrote on the issue. Green Party co-leader, Meteria Turei, also on Wednesday's show, has followed up in response.

"Dear Chester Borrows,

Last night on TVNZ 7's Back Benches you engaged in a discussion about the merits of bringing back the Hero Parade.

You said that, personally you didn't support the Parade; that you didn't think being gay or lesbian necessarily made people heroes; that no-one should define themselves or be defined by their sexual preference; and that people should be freely able to love whomever they choose.

Metiria Turei then labelled you homophobic, which I think was unfair, unhelpful, and uninformed.

Also in the blogosphere, there’s been a bit of debate about Roger Douglas’ political legacy – with Eric Crampton arguing in favour, the Dim-Post arguing against, and Imperator Fish poking some fun.

----------------------------------------

In additional to these highlights, below are the internet links to all the NZ politics material from the last 24 hours that are either informative, insightful, interesting or influential.

Section 1: Mainstream media

Fledgling minor parties

Joanne Carroll and Kieran Nash (NZH): Chinese-backed party launched in Botany

Jonathan Milne and Leigh van der Stoep (NZH): NZ's still first for Winston Peters

DP: Banks noncommittal on running for Parliament

Matt McCarten (NZH): Far right sneaked new party in under radar

TV3: Winston Peters vows to stop sale of state assets (Video)

NZPA: Winston Peters hits out at John Key

Maori Party and Hone Harawira

Claire Trevett (NZH): Rebel MP 'wanted job as a minister'

NZPA: Harawira hearing to continue tomorrow

Maori and ethnic politics