WHEN EVERYBODY LIVED in villages, and every village had a graveyard, the expression “whistling past the graveyard” made more sense. Even so, it’s hard to describe the Coalition Government’s response to the latest Taxpayers’ Union/Curia Research poll any better. Regardless of whether they wanted to go there, or not, the polling data is leading the Coalition partners’ thoughts inexorably towards the dreary burial-ground of electoral hopes.
As they draw nearer to that dismal place, the tune they have elected to whistle to keep up the courage of their jittery supporters is that old political favourite: “Don’t Worry, We’ve Been Here Before.”
Conservative voters are invited to cast their minds back to 1990-1993, the first term of the Jim Bolger-led National Government. (That rules out every voter under the age of 40, but, never mind, they can always Google it!)
In the years preceding the 1993 General Election, we are told by National’s whistlers, the opinion polls also showed National lagging behind its opponents. (One survey put them at just 21 percent!) When all the votes had been counted, however, National found itself with just enough seats to govern.
On the night, and facing the prospect of a hung parliament, Bolger was not moved to breathe a huge sigh of relief. In the run-up to election day, he had been persuaded that National was on track for a comfortable win. Denied his easy victory, a clearly frustrated Bolger was moved to deliver the most memorable quote of the entire campaign:
“Bugger the pollsters!”
But, National’s whistlers are forgetting something. The General Election of 1993 was the last conducted under the First-Past-the-Post (FPP) electoral system. Indeed, it was also the year in which New Zealanders voted decisively to replace FPP with Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) representation. Looking for solace in Bolger’s narrow 1993 victory is, therefore, a lot like looking for cheese in a chalk factory.
Not a good analogy, then? But wait, it gets weirder.
The Jim Bolger-led National Party had been swept to victory in 1990 on a wave of revulsion at the damage inflicted upon New Zealand society by Labour’s “Rogernomics” – the top-down free-market revolution for which it had never asked, or received, an unequivocal mandate. Promising a return to the “Decent Society” of happy memory, Bolger’s party romped home with just shy of 48 percent of the popular vote.
Three years later, after discovering that the Decent Society entailed the Employment Contracts Act, the Mother of All Budgets, and user-pays health care, National emerged from the last FPP election with just 35 percent of the popular vote. The anti-government parties, Labour, the Alliance and NZ First, between them accounted for 61 percent of the popular vote.
It is practically inconceivable that the 1993 election result, replicated under New Zealand’s current electoral system, would see the incumbent government returned to office. What happened in 1993, largely on account of the anti-government vote being split three ways, would not happen today, because under MMP the parties opposing the government would be allocated parliamentary seats in proportion to the number of Party Votes they received.
Barring something unprecedented occurring (like Labour entering into a “grand coalition” with National) if the 2026 General Election leaves the anti-government parties sharing 61 percent of the popular vote – as they did in 1993 – then they will have more than enough seats to form a government.
After all, the 50.6 percent claimed by Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori in the Taxpayers Union/Curia Research Poll would still give them enough seats to govern.
National hung on in 1993 because, under FPP, 35 percent of the vote was enough to secure them just enough seats to govern. But National, Act, and NZ First, if they continue, as Bolger’s government continued between 1990 and 1993, to implement policies opposed by a significant majority of the New Zealand electorate, should not anticipate a similar, by-the-skin-of-their-teeth, happy ending.
And yet, this is precisely the advice being tendered to the Coalition Government by the Taxpayers’ Union and other assorted ideological cheerleaders. The very policies that are driving the Government’s numbers down, it is suggested, must not be discarded as electoral liabilities, but instead, “all options should be on the table”.
Rather than whistling past the graveyard, any government disposed to heed such advice should probably be praying in the church.
This essay was originally published in The Otago Daily Times and The Greymouth Star of Friday, 14 March 2025.
My feeling last election was that Labour was beyond terrible but that National only represents a bunch of it's capitalist cronies.
ReplyDeleteImagine wanting to double the size of Auckland and increase tourism!
Then there is tourism. They can't get drivers, so they bring in Indians.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Indians, but as Ha-joon Chang says, a Swedish driver earns 50 times that of an Indian. The reason is borders.
Meanwhile, old Winston finishes the rodeo again on 5%, exactly where he belongs. The criticisms being leveled at Nigel Farage seem to apply to Winston.
In a country without a national identity, the only pride you can have is how much money you have (as Bob Jones argued).
A couple of things. As mathematically challenged as I am, I am pretty sure that the latest Taxpayers’ Union/Curia Research poll would create an overhang if TPM successfully defends the electorates.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to 1993, it is interesting that while awaiting specials the Alliance had the balance of power. The leader, James Patrick Anderton, had indicated that the Alliance would first negotiate a coalition agreement with the party tht got the highest representation. That was National. When the specials were returned, National had the electoral mandate under FPP to govern alone.
I should quickly note that a National - Alliance coalition agreement would have to get past what would undoubtedly be hostile Alliance party structure (which was then five constituent parties). Indeed, it may well have split the Alliance caucus of two. However, it remains one of NZ politics not only "what ifs" but "near misses".
You might be right. ( although it’s pretty clear you’re a man of the left)
ReplyDeleteAnd if this government fails, after the clear failure of the last one, what are the odds of any measure of success, by the lineup of loiterers you perhaps grace with the appellation ‘Left’? As with taggers, who if they were any better would not do bad, just to prove they exist, nothing good can come from that crew. Contrary personality mixed with grievance is a long long way from what you prob hold as good.
Jim Anderton, David Lange, Jeanette Fitzsimmons are not around for their opinion on that lot. Perhaps you would hear them.
But, who knows. The advantage of the small boat is quick reaction, but that can’t apply if the crew are incompetent or drongos. That was NZs advantage and saving in lucky years past. Perhaps MMP was a brief democratic interlude and NZ if unlucky must go back to the methods of Mr Muldoon. Elite cohesion worked OK in simpler times.
You won’t like that though, even if it has a lefty tiara on it.
Very unlucky, could see us a Rwanda of the S Pacific. Is there a force in the world that might wish this? I can think of one.
There is no cohesion possible with Greens or TPM, and their version of elite I’m sure you would like even less than Muldoon.
Totally agree 👍
Delete`There is no cohesion possible with Greens or TPM, and their version of elite I’m sure you would like even less than Muldoon.'
DeleteRawiri Waititi and his wife proved that at the weekend and the Tamatha Paul from the Greens endorsed the overall lunacy in wanting Dean Wickliffe released from prison and the NZ Police Force disbanded.
These people are nuts and some people want them to be the Government.
Hi Chris
ReplyDeleteThat the current National led coalition government should be languishing in the polls 18 months after the most appallingly incompetent woke Labour government in our nation’s history is nothing short of a rejection of Luxon’s inability to read the room, to follow his political instincts and allowing himself to be guided by yesteryears political advisors.
It is not just about the economy stupid.
Many of us were appalled by Labour’s concessions to Maori Waitangi tribunal radicalism. Appalled by the embrace of DEI, appalled by queer gender ideology being promoted in our schools, dismayed by the radical socialism and ahistorical history curriculum. We were looking for a conservative Government, and what have we got? Luke warm ‘me too’ socialism with an inability to address the fundamental issues of our time.
It’s not just about the economy, stupid.
Then there is this: Apparently the electorate would prefer a Labour, Greens, Ta matu Maori government. I’m in my 70’s and have been moderately successful in business. I can tell you right now that there is no future for wealth creators in this country if the Labour, Greents, Te Pati Maori coalition becomes Government anytime soon. We all might as well migrate to Australia where two of my five children are making a great future for themselves and for their children.
Seriously, it is that bad.
A major problem being the major electorate are composed of those of the civil service, or them that bleed from it.
DeleteThey! are also of the opinion they are the major wealth creators ?. Perhaps its because they form the biggest number of tax payers.
Wealth creators they are most definitely not.... not even when ensconced in the education sector.
Its not just about the economy therein either.... though there is a sector of it that are entirely stupid.
It’s interesting the different points of view on the governments current standing. If the government seems to be reacting casually to the latest Curia poll thats fine by me. Although Luxon’s own popularity has dropped National as a party has recovered 1.7 pts. This at a time where they have been bashed for the slow recovery of the economy. Which imo hasn’t been slow at all. Along with the bad press for not killing off the treaty bill earlier, and being associated with the school lunch debacle which is pathetic when we consider what other issues this country faces. We also have the health system still not functioning along with principals believing the NCEA exams are too hard for some of our students. Looking at the reality of whats going on at present I believe the poll result was pretty good for the coalition. What can’t be reconciled in my mind is why the Greens only dropped to 10% and why on earth did Labour rise 2.8%. What did they do to deserve that. I mean if you don’t do anything stay in the same position, but to actually go up. The other two results make sense under the circumstances. So to cut the blurb I don’t see this poll result as meaning much at all and that goes for all the results. Although MMP gives us the result of the votes for all party’s, and what they supposedly stand for, I still believe NZ is roughly split between socialism and capitalism. The capitalist coalition we have now will stay in power if the economy recovers and the majority of the population feel their life has improved. If it doesn’t the socialist labour coalition will get in and initiate their policy’s which will be a continuation of the last government and in my view will throw up a similar result. National and Labour will try and stay at the centre and the smaller party’s will bounce around at the extremes on both the capitalist and socialist sides of the ledger. Although we look at trends from the past, imo we need to look at the curve balls that change the political scene currently. The economy is number one, but things like minister performance and behaviour can turn the tide along with the big elephant in the room and that is the outcome of the Treaty bill submissions and how the players from both sides react to the results. If Luxon can snaffle a trade deal with India it will be a tick for him but to keep his job he needs to improve his image. Once again I feel we just have to be patient and by the end of the year the situation will be clearer.
ReplyDeleteI would like to have read your whole comment but... paragraphs, please
DeleteArguably Chris Luxon was appointed as the leader of the National Party on the basis of his corporate background. And no doubt the alignment of his personal beliefs and that of the Party. Now he finds himself PM. But CEO in the corporate world is not quite the same as PM in a three way collation.
ReplyDelete“The CEO, as the highest-ranking executive, is responsible for the overall direction, strategy, and operations of a company, acting as the main point of communication between the board of directors and the company, and ensuring its profitability and competitiveness”.
That’s straight from Google.
For sake of analogy let’s say the political equivalent of “a company” is the nation state. Who then are “the board of directors” of this nation state?
Again, straight from Google: “The board of directors is a group of people elected by shareholders to represent their interests and oversee the company's management, making major decisions about the company's direction and ensuring its success”.
With the same analogy the “board of directors” might be the elected members of the National Party, in particular those appointed Ministers by the Executive, elected not by shareholders per se but by the voting public in a democratic general election. It is the voting public who wish to see their interests represented and more generally want to see the national interests well managed. Cynicism aside – that’s is to say, is democracy simply a façade in a neoliberal game where ‘shareholder interests’ extent well beyond the voting public – under MMP a coalition government must clearly make compromises.
Labour firmly lost the last election. National appeared to be happy/lost in opposition and had done little work to convince anyone they had a new direction, rather they reheated pointless poorly targeted tax cuts, as they did way back in the day. The common thread is Luxon.
ReplyDeleteA good head of department doing whatever the boss wants, trying "really really hard" to please, no matter how ridiculous the task. Even an average diplomat, same rationale. But would give away the house to do a deal to please at least by the reckoning of the image it creates. But as a leader, the man where the buck stops, he is so far out of his depth. The government he leads is directionless with no bottom lines.
To me this National led coalition problems start and end with it's leadership. The kitchen is on fire, constitutionally, but Luxon is busy not noticing while he tries to clean the rest of the house to please.
His fumbling around, still playing the head of department, trying to impress but not realising his efforts at pleasing are sinking his government. National do NOT want to confront this terminal problem because National are cowards, but I'm guessing ACT and NZF do.
The Taxpayers Union must be pulling their hair out at this lost cause!
Best wishes, good man. This chap is a great talker for the truth. We relied on him.
ReplyDeleteMy shit landlords here in Gisborne have just put up my rent, as they do annually, by 16 %. I just put up my hourly rate by 8 %, reflecting only the inflation rate over the last 2 years, since I'm no longer reliable as an old guy in my physical job. I told the rental agent off for the first time.
For your next post Chris:
ReplyDeleteLocalism (Tar and Feathers)
https://nzissues.com/Community/threads/trust-in-nz.67279/