Caleb Anderson: The NZ First Conundrum - and its potential undoing

Last week Shane Jones issued a warning to the Waitangi Tribunal indicating, basically, that NZ First expects them to stay in their lane.

There was something odd about this media release, both in respect of content, and in respect of timing.

I had to wonder if this was in response to, or in anticipation of, a much stronger stand to be taken by Act in the same week, indicating a determination to decisively, and persistently, legislate against, and uproot, any action at variance with the concept of absolute equality under the law, one person one vote, each of equal status.

There is no doubt that the positions taken by these parties on this very issue will make a significant impact on the electoral appeal of both NZ First and Act, especially with conservative leaning voters, and National Party members seeking alignment.

I have the following concerns about New Zealand Firsts position.

1. Almost no politician has had the opportunities that Mr Peters has had over a very long period of time to see what was coming and to take action to thwart this.

2. It has, perhaps conveniently, never seemed to be a non-negotiable bottom line for Mr Peters, where other things have.

3. NZ First pronouncements on this issue seem somewhat inconsistent over time. The drum beats loudly at election time, and is barely audible during any term in which he has (they have) been in government.

Those willing to give a moment's thought to the implications of rights based on ancestry, on past wrongs, or on the ideologies (or fashion) of the moment, might just see this as the most important issue facing New Zealand (and maybe the wider West) at the moment, and thus the issue that determines their vote.

There will be many pressing issues to occupy the attention of any new government, for sure, but enough voters will likely be of a mind that getting the basics right must surely mean addressing this very issue, even if the media conspires to ignore it.

Democracy is not an add on, it is the foundational principle, on which all else is built. You cannot play with it.

It means what it means ... that every citizen has an equal opportunity to determine the direction of its government, and the future of the nation, unencumbered by gender, race, status, or history.

Thus, to play with democracy, in the smallest degree, is simply to negate it.

Anything less than an equal and universal franchise, no matter how it is dressed up, no matter what it asserts to fix, no matter the past, is the beginning of a nation's undoing. If history attests to anything it attests to this, without a single exception.

I would like to suggest that if NZ First does not make the defence of democracy, as defined above, including any nibbling at the edges, an absolute bottom line, then voters should look elsewhere.

Democracy is largely a handbrake on the true nature of man ... the perpetual propensity to wish for what others have, to blame others for one's shortcomings, and to take advantage when it presents itself.

It is the one day in each electoral cycle when no person's influence is greater than another's, and while not perfect, it is by far the best invention that history has gifted us.

Mr Peters has often asserted that NZ First has been a handbrake where it was necessary for it to be so, but not so here it seems. If Mr Peters is not explicit on this matter, or if he obfuscates, as he so often does, it is worth holding one's nose and voting elsewhere.

The price of doing otherwise would be too great.

Caleb Anderson, a graduate history, economics, psychotherapy and theology, has been an educator for over thirty years, twenty as a school principal.