Owen Jennings: TOP in Hypocrisy

Questions for Voters:

Opportunity (TOP), helped by a fawning media, are posing as kingmakers in this election.  Given that this critical role would determine our future for a decade or more should we not know more about them?

Are they the new squeaky-clean broom to tidy up politics or do they just have a shiny surface hiding the same old mud underneath?

No one is asking the hard questions.  Opportunity could be holding the ace card next week.  Are they a fit party to hold such critical influence, determining your destiny?

They have made headlines with claims on limiting election spending.  But isn’t this hypocrisy – a case of “do as we say not as we do” with its demands for a $30,000 cap to election spending when the party was founded with a donation of over $2 million?

They have willingly hoovered up large six figure donations this election.  The Electoral Commission has published at least three such donations.  The party campaigns against big donations while accepting them.    

Does this ‘holier -than-thou’ approach stand scrutiny?

The party’s biggest donor this year, who recently changed his name, now sits on the Opportunity board – the same governing board that had to change its rules when it was exposed as totally controlling their policy.  Is it little wonder big hitters wanted to be on the board where they could dictate policy without being elected, without stepping out of their boardroom, without being accountable to the voters?

This particular donor is said to have claimed, "To change the game you kind of have to play the game first."  Does Opportunity accept big donors into its decision-making processes so they can “change the game?”  How does this cowboy style of politics fit with a party “cleaning up politics”?

Opportunity proposes specialised “expert” groups who determine policy in key areas like health and education.  What happens to democracy and power in the hands of the people?  We already have “experts” shaping policy.  They are called public servants or bureaucrats, and they already have too much influence.

We need mature leaders, with strong intellect, who have the integrity and courage to require reform and improved outcomes – not more “experts.”

Do New Zealanders want a minor party with the right to decide the future who had to advertise on Seek for a leader so it could pose an acceptable smiling public face, a person with a capacity to flick away genuine concerns?  New Zealand does not need puppets on strings pulled by wealthy funders hiding behind secretive boards.  

The country needs sound policies not likable presenters.  The regular occupation with unnecessary trivia and sideshows might pay the media’s bills but it doesn’t inform or assist voters making decisions of great moment.

How much is the public not hearing?

The Opportunity party was founded on two unusual, major, policy planks – universal income and land tax.  As soon as questions were raised about the integrity of these strange ideals, the board quickly decided to hide them behind a set of meaningless, watery, “bottom lines”.  

Can a party that so quickly buries its core claims be trusted to determine the future of our country?  Can a party that can change its founding principles at the drop of a hat change them again to voter’s detriment?  As Groucho said, “those are my principles, and if you don't like them, well, I have others."

There are claims made that Opportunity has extreme, left-leaning members on its board and advisors.  Kiwis need to know who and what shapes Opportunity’s policies, especially with their desire to have strong board influence over their policy direction. 

What role does once rejected, disgraced, former Labour party Minister Iain Lees-Galloway play in the party?  Does he run the Wellington Ginger Group that seems to influence all Opportunities affairs?  Should voters be concerned that a person of doubtful, decision-making ability be the power behind the leader’s throne and be engineering the positioning of the party that may hold the balance of power next week?

The ‘lily-white’ image quickly melts when information spills out about board disagreements and decisions that are made without the board’s sign off.  How does the image survive criticisms of board members who publicly admit a ‘toxic culture’ and ‘behind the scenes power struggles’.  Just another party with power hungry individuals using and abusing the system.

The rise of the Opportunity party in this election has caught the mainstream media’s attention.  TOP has received six times the favourable coverage in the legacy media than ACT and eight times that of NZFirst.  Hat tip to David Farrar for this analysis.

Does Opportunity deserve such favourable status?

Opportunity is not a new broom that New Zealand politics needs; it’s just another political mop with a freshly polished handle?

 

Former MP Owen Jennings, a former Member of Parliament and President of Federated Farmers, maintains a keen interest in ensuring agricultural policies are sensible and fit for purpose.