When Soper pointed out that Labour had “just lost a Prime Minister”, Wilson replied: “They’re stronger than ever before!”
Who could have guessed that the very next day a ministerial wheel would fall off Labour’s wagon? On May 2, news broke that Meka Whaitiri was defecting to Te Pāti Māori.
The full implications of her shift to another party are quickly becoming apparent. Most obviously, it has made it clear the Labour government is hardly stable given that Chris Hipkins has been obliged to yet again reshuffle his ministerial line-up, this time to fill the gaps Whaitiri had left. It was just four weeks ago he undertook a similar exercise after Stuart Nash was relieved of his portfolios for leaking confidential Cabinet information to two party donors.
The musical chairs have been particularly apparent in the revolving door for the lead recovery minister for Cyclone Gabrielle in the Hawke’s Bay. This week, Kieran McAnulty was the latest to step into the position after the brief tenures of Nash and Whaitiri.
Perhaps the most damaging aspect of Whaitiri’s defection, however, is that it has shown Hipkins has as little control over his ministers as Jacinda Ardern had. Last November, Nanaia Mahuta stitched up a late-night Three Waters entrenchment deal with a Green MP behind her Cabinet colleagues’ backs, leading Ardern to publicly abase herself by insisting it was a “team mistake”. NZ First’s Shane Jones wasn’t the only one to conclude that the main reason for Ardern’s resignation in January was the very public loss of control over her Cabinet.
Now, after one of his own ministers has quit without even having the courtesy to contact him, Hipkins has been left sounding like a spurned and plaintive lover, effectively saying that Meka never rings; she never calls, but she had his number and was “welcome to call me anytime”.
After Hipkins’ weak-kneed attempts to deal with Nash’s earlier transgressions until finally sacking him, the confected media image that he had briefly enjoyed earlier this year as a leader with a ruthless streak has disintegrated.
Further evidence of just how shaky Hipkins’ government is came on TVNZ’s Q&A show on Sunday. Minister for Māori Development Willie Jackson told host Jack Tame that in the wake of Whaitiri’s departure he had convened a meeting of the Māori caucus to ask whether any other MPs were also likely to defect. In short, he wanted to find out whether Labour should expect more wobbly wheels to fly off the government’s vehicle.
When Jackson said, “No one’s going anywhere,” Tame asked: ”Are you sure?”
Jackson: “Well, that’s what they said on Friday.”
On Tuesday, it was reported that Labour’s Māori caucus had held a meeting about locking its members in for the election. As a result, Mahuta — who had been rumoured to be another possible defector — stated her nomination for Labour had been confirmed.
So far, you’d have to say the score on the stability / instability question — and whether the government was “going from strength to strength” as Wilson insisted — reads: Barry Soper, 1: Simon Wilson, 0.
Whaitiri jumping ship to Te Pāti Māori — a move she has described as “coming home” — has given National the perfect opportunity to emphasise that Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori constitute a single bloc on the left and a vote for any one of them is a vote for that particular triad becoming the next government. On Wednesday, after months of shilly-shallying, Christopher Luxon finally drew a line in the sand by stating unequivocally that he had ruled out National coming to any arrangement with Te Pāti Māori in forming a government after this year’s election.
He also dubbed the three parties a “coalition of chaos”, which is a description he could only convincingly offer at a time when Labour is in evident disarray. If Labour did appear to be united, voters might well imagine that Hipkins would be able to wrangle any coalition partners into a coherent administration. That seems difficult to believe right now, given Whaitiri’s move across the aisle, the recent ructions among the Greens that led MP Elizabeth Kerekere to quit the party, and Te Pāti Māori’s antics this week in Parliament that saw them evicted.
Painting the opposition parties as a shambolic group is a tactic National successfully rolled out in the 2014 and 2017 elections, when it held the government benches, under John Key and Bill English respectively.
In 2014, its campaign ad featured a slim, sleek vessel propelled by a squad of fit, young rowers in blue. Near the end of the clip, it was contrasted with an old tub with red and green stripes, floundering in the water.
In 2017, National’s strategists switched to a squad of disciplined runners clad in teal, powering past a clumsy group dressed in red, green and black (representing NZ First) who were tied together at the ankles.
A similar ad is not an option for National in 2023, not least because it is onto its fifth leader since the 2017 election and, with such a fractured recent history, it can hardly promote itself as a sleek and unified team — even if Chris Luxon has done an impressive job in imposing discipline on his MPs since he became leader in November 2021. But it’s a safe bet that the accusation of Labour leading a chaotic and divided coalition will drive much of National’s campaign rhetoric this year.
As no doubt it will for Act’s push to be part of the next government too. After Whaitiri was asked on TVNZ’s Breakfast on Tuesday, “Do you not trust the Prime Minister?”, and she ambiguously replied, “No, I trust my family”, David Seymour pounced with the question: “If someone who was a minister until a few days ago can’t trust the Prime Minister, how can New Zealanders trust him?”
Journalists have pointed out that a possible coalition of National, Act and NZ First could also be dubbed a “coalition of chaos” given David Seymour’s antipathy to working with Winston Peters. However, Luxon has first-mover advantage with that epithet and none of those parties are given to the extravagant theatrics in Parliament that Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer are so fond of performing.
Welcoming Whaitiri to the House with a karakia on Tuesday without the agreement of other parties or the Speaker himself led to Waititi and Ngarewa-Packer being ejected.
Whaitiri’s grand entrance was obviously designed to draw attention to Te Pāti Māori having extracted a scalp from Labour but it seemed a bizarre way to reintroduce a woman to a workplace where she has been employed continuously for the past 10 years.
As National MP Chris Bishop put it: “Meka Whaitiri is a member of Parliament. She could have just entered the debating chamber like the other 119 MPs did this afternoon.”
Creating chaos is something Te Pati Maori’s leaders seem to enjoy. Their shenanigans no doubt appeal to their base but they will only turbo-charge the narrative National will build around a “coalition of chaos” — and one that Labour will struggle to counter.
Graham Adams is an Auckland-based freelance editor, journalist and columnist. This article was originally published by The Platform and is published here with kind permission.
The full implications of her shift to another party are quickly becoming apparent. Most obviously, it has made it clear the Labour government is hardly stable given that Chris Hipkins has been obliged to yet again reshuffle his ministerial line-up, this time to fill the gaps Whaitiri had left. It was just four weeks ago he undertook a similar exercise after Stuart Nash was relieved of his portfolios for leaking confidential Cabinet information to two party donors.
The musical chairs have been particularly apparent in the revolving door for the lead recovery minister for Cyclone Gabrielle in the Hawke’s Bay. This week, Kieran McAnulty was the latest to step into the position after the brief tenures of Nash and Whaitiri.
Perhaps the most damaging aspect of Whaitiri’s defection, however, is that it has shown Hipkins has as little control over his ministers as Jacinda Ardern had. Last November, Nanaia Mahuta stitched up a late-night Three Waters entrenchment deal with a Green MP behind her Cabinet colleagues’ backs, leading Ardern to publicly abase herself by insisting it was a “team mistake”. NZ First’s Shane Jones wasn’t the only one to conclude that the main reason for Ardern’s resignation in January was the very public loss of control over her Cabinet.
Now, after one of his own ministers has quit without even having the courtesy to contact him, Hipkins has been left sounding like a spurned and plaintive lover, effectively saying that Meka never rings; she never calls, but she had his number and was “welcome to call me anytime”.
After Hipkins’ weak-kneed attempts to deal with Nash’s earlier transgressions until finally sacking him, the confected media image that he had briefly enjoyed earlier this year as a leader with a ruthless streak has disintegrated.
Further evidence of just how shaky Hipkins’ government is came on TVNZ’s Q&A show on Sunday. Minister for Māori Development Willie Jackson told host Jack Tame that in the wake of Whaitiri’s departure he had convened a meeting of the Māori caucus to ask whether any other MPs were also likely to defect. In short, he wanted to find out whether Labour should expect more wobbly wheels to fly off the government’s vehicle.
When Jackson said, “No one’s going anywhere,” Tame asked: ”Are you sure?”
Jackson: “Well, that’s what they said on Friday.”
On Tuesday, it was reported that Labour’s Māori caucus had held a meeting about locking its members in for the election. As a result, Mahuta — who had been rumoured to be another possible defector — stated her nomination for Labour had been confirmed.
So far, you’d have to say the score on the stability / instability question — and whether the government was “going from strength to strength” as Wilson insisted — reads: Barry Soper, 1: Simon Wilson, 0.
Whaitiri jumping ship to Te Pāti Māori — a move she has described as “coming home” — has given National the perfect opportunity to emphasise that Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori constitute a single bloc on the left and a vote for any one of them is a vote for that particular triad becoming the next government. On Wednesday, after months of shilly-shallying, Christopher Luxon finally drew a line in the sand by stating unequivocally that he had ruled out National coming to any arrangement with Te Pāti Māori in forming a government after this year’s election.
He also dubbed the three parties a “coalition of chaos”, which is a description he could only convincingly offer at a time when Labour is in evident disarray. If Labour did appear to be united, voters might well imagine that Hipkins would be able to wrangle any coalition partners into a coherent administration. That seems difficult to believe right now, given Whaitiri’s move across the aisle, the recent ructions among the Greens that led MP Elizabeth Kerekere to quit the party, and Te Pāti Māori’s antics this week in Parliament that saw them evicted.
Painting the opposition parties as a shambolic group is a tactic National successfully rolled out in the 2014 and 2017 elections, when it held the government benches, under John Key and Bill English respectively.
In 2014, its campaign ad featured a slim, sleek vessel propelled by a squad of fit, young rowers in blue. Near the end of the clip, it was contrasted with an old tub with red and green stripes, floundering in the water.
In 2017, National’s strategists switched to a squad of disciplined runners clad in teal, powering past a clumsy group dressed in red, green and black (representing NZ First) who were tied together at the ankles.
A similar ad is not an option for National in 2023, not least because it is onto its fifth leader since the 2017 election and, with such a fractured recent history, it can hardly promote itself as a sleek and unified team — even if Chris Luxon has done an impressive job in imposing discipline on his MPs since he became leader in November 2021. But it’s a safe bet that the accusation of Labour leading a chaotic and divided coalition will drive much of National’s campaign rhetoric this year.
As no doubt it will for Act’s push to be part of the next government too. After Whaitiri was asked on TVNZ’s Breakfast on Tuesday, “Do you not trust the Prime Minister?”, and she ambiguously replied, “No, I trust my family”, David Seymour pounced with the question: “If someone who was a minister until a few days ago can’t trust the Prime Minister, how can New Zealanders trust him?”
Journalists have pointed out that a possible coalition of National, Act and NZ First could also be dubbed a “coalition of chaos” given David Seymour’s antipathy to working with Winston Peters. However, Luxon has first-mover advantage with that epithet and none of those parties are given to the extravagant theatrics in Parliament that Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer are so fond of performing.
Welcoming Whaitiri to the House with a karakia on Tuesday without the agreement of other parties or the Speaker himself led to Waititi and Ngarewa-Packer being ejected.
Whaitiri’s grand entrance was obviously designed to draw attention to Te Pāti Māori having extracted a scalp from Labour but it seemed a bizarre way to reintroduce a woman to a workplace where she has been employed continuously for the past 10 years.
As National MP Chris Bishop put it: “Meka Whaitiri is a member of Parliament. She could have just entered the debating chamber like the other 119 MPs did this afternoon.”
Creating chaos is something Te Pati Maori’s leaders seem to enjoy. Their shenanigans no doubt appeal to their base but they will only turbo-charge the narrative National will build around a “coalition of chaos” — and one that Labour will struggle to counter.
Graham Adams is an Auckland-based freelance editor, journalist and columnist. This article was originally published by The Platform and is published here with kind permission.
2 comments:
The Guardian would do NZ a big favour by offering Simon Wilson a job - then his overt bias could be justified.
As it is, he lacks credibility of any sort.
Agree with you Anonymous. The Herald does itself no favours, even if his moniker is "Senior Writer". He's certainly not a journalist, opinionated blogger more like it.
Post a Comment