Thanks for all that info. Very interesting. 🙂 And I stand corrected about the Greens cooperating with National thing. I obviously got mixed up there!

You’re right about the grand coalition thing I think – in the end it wouldn’t have worked, especially back then. The personalities were all wrong. Of course, the NZ First/National thing didn’t go that well either. It was no wonder they were thumped in 1999.

“I didn’t mean to make it sound like the Nats were innocent bystanders. You and I have discussed the economic policies they pushed in the 90s before and you know I thought they were wrong. It was just a very long post and there’s a limit to how much detail I can go in.”

Sure, I accept that, just felt it should be mentioned because it’s the strife caused by the policies those two govts pushed that gave us the MMP system we’re so pleased to have now. And for all Winston has done wrong since, he played an important part in bringing that to pass by opposing his own party at no small personal cost.

“By saying it was National who rejected the Greens, you’re implying that the Greens would have gone into coalition with them. You know that’s not true – their conference has held votes on it because there are a small number saying they should, and they routinely get voted down. I am glad they work with the Nats to get things done that are on their own agenda, like the insulation programme.”

No, I’m not implying a coalition would have happened, I’m just saying that while unlikely, the Greens have left the door open the last two elections. You are wrong about the conference votes; the minority was those of the opinion that the Greens should not consider National under any circumstances. The same logic that has led the Greens to work with National on items of mutual interest was applied by the majority to argue they should always be open to talk, no matter how unlikely an agreement might be. The Greens usually get criticised for having such a nuanced position, but its totally in the spirit of Green politics, not to mention MMP itself.

“I don’t remember what happened very well with the fraud thing. I vaguely remember a ?privileges committee hearing that cleared him but I also remember thinking he was guilty and that was just a technicality. Thanks for your info on that – I knew you would know what happened and I hoped you’d comment on it!”

I figured you were expecting a long comment from me and didn’t want to let you down 🙂

In 2008, the privileges committee recommended Winston be censured for “knowingly providing false or misleading information on a return of pecuniary interests” in relation to the handling of a $100k donation from Owen Glenn. This was supported by all parties on the committee except NZF and Labour.

“I also remember that the idea of a grand coalition was very popular with the public, and I think most people would have preferred that. Whether it could have worked or not is another matter. However, I think I’m right in saying that the Labour party currently votes with National more often than the Maori Party does, so maybe it could have worked.”

I’m not so sure. As the two traditional parties of power, they really despise each other no matter how much they agree on. It’s a zero sum game for them and I can’t see it lasting the term, and Clark would have been stupid to gamble Labour would come out on top. Sure would have been interesting, though.

I didn’t mean to make it sound like the Nats were innocent bystanders. You and I have discussed the economic policies they pushed in the 90s before and you know I thought they were wrong. It was just a very long post and there’s a limit to how much detail I can go in. The post wasn’t about policy, so I largely left that out. That applies to some of your other comments too – I don’t disagree with your characterization, although I might have expressed things differently, it’s just that I can’t include everything.

I admit though I’d forgotten about the tea pot saga, which was stupid of me, because without that I’m also quite sure he wouldn’t have made the 5% threshold that year.

And yes, I do mean “perceived” about Green/Blue voters, though I suspect their opinion of what’s enough is different from the Green Party.

I’ve since discovered that this isn’t the only time he’s resorted to this particular Bible verse. This clip from YouTube looks like the Northland by-election:

https://youtu.be/Jl0O0tNT408

By saying it was National who rejected the Greens, you’re implying that the Greens would have gone into coalition with them. You know that’s not true – their conference has held votes on it because there are a small number saying they should, and they routinely get voted down. I am glad they work with the Nats to get things done that are on their own agenda, like the insulation programme.

I don’t remember what happened very well with the fraud thing. I vaguely remember a ?privileges committee hearing that cleared him but I also remember thinking he was guilty and that was just a technicality. Thanks for your info on that – I knew you would know what happened and I hoped you’d comment on it!

I distinctly remember the press conference where Peters made his announcement in 1996, though I could easily be remembering incorrectly the order of things. I know half way through I knew he was going with National because of something he said, but I seemed to be in a minority with that opinion. I also remember that the idea of a grand coalition was very popular with the public, and I think most people would have preferred that. Whether it could have worked or not is another matter. However, I think I’m right in saying that the Labour party currently votes with National more often than the Maori Party does, so maybe it could have worked. (For non-NZers, National and the Maori party are in coalition.)

That’s a shame. Despite everything, we still have one of the most stable governments in the world, and there are limits to what a rogue party can get away with.

Would 5% of Canadians even vote for an all-out Nazi party anyway? I have my doubts. We had the Conservative party trying to get in at the last two elections, but they couldn’t make the threshold. It’s over 100,000 vote in a population of 4.7 million. They might like a new party on one or two issues, but usually not enough want them actually running the country. Peters was a familiar figure who had a long-term following from a mainstream party. We have another party that only makes it because their leader is also a former National MP and he keeps winning his own electorate.

And if I may add a bit of additional information:

“For many years he had a reputation as a man of integrity, though there were allegations of campaign finance fraud made in 2008, that may or may not be true, but put a big dent in his reputation.”

Whether it was technically fraud can be debated, but Winston was definitely playing the system close to the line and hypocritically claimed nothing was wrong. He eventually admitted he’d misled the public, in part because several key staff threatened to quit in protest at the damage he was doing the party, but by then it was too late.

“Even though there is no likelihood of the left-wing Greens ever entering into a coalition with the centre-right National party,…“

Though note that it was National who ruled out the Greens at the last election, not the other way around.

“If those voters defected to the Greens because National didn’t take it’s responsibilities as guardians of our environment seriously enough, it would likely mean a Labour-Greens coalition government and National would be out of power.”

I hope you mean “perceived” to take its responsibilities seriously, as there is no evidence that National actually does so, as the deterioration of our rivers and drinking water attests, not to mention their terrible record on climate change, lack of protection of Maui’s dolphin, thwarted desire to mine in national parks, plans to allow deep see oil drilling, the list goes on.

“He was made a cabinet member and Minister of Māori Affairs when National took over government in 1990, but soon made himself disliked and mistrusted among his colleagues because of the way he publicly attacked his own party. He was eventually sacked as a minister in 1991. He continued as a National MP until 1993, but as his behaviour hadn’t changed since he lost his ministerial role it was decided he would not be allowed to be a candidate for them at the election that year.”

You make it sound like National were innocent bystanders. Remember that the fourth labour govt were kicked out, because people were sick to death of the most extreme neoliberal economic policies ever unleashed on the country. Until National came in that is. The new finance minister was even more extreme than the previous one as the Nats turned the screws and the suffering increased even further. Winston, who was expected to be the next leader of the National party and the first Maori Prime Minister, to his everlasting credit, said no. This is also why the public, fed up with both sides, voted in MMP at the next election in the first place.

“For a month he negotiated behind the scenes with the two parties. He then held a news conference to announce which party he was going to support. No one knew his decision. The leaders of National and Labour had to wait along with everyone else as he spoke at length, giving little away, to see what his decision would be. He eventually stated he would be throwing his support behind National. It then took another seven weeks to sort out his coalition agreement with National. His taking advantage of holding the balance of power in this way, and the length of time he took – virtually holding the whole country to ransom – made many extremely angry with him.”

I’m not sure you have this quite right. I don’t know of an announcement at four weeks, but believe that he negotiated for nine weeks with both sides before going with National. I have it from some one involved in those negotiations that National’s leader, Bolger, was so sick of it that he offered the Labour leader a grand coalition. She knew her time would come and wisely refused.

“This led to a rise in his support and by the 2002 election his share of the vote was back up to 10%. He hoped this would see Labour leader Helen Clark courting his support. However, much to his chagrin, she rejected him. Perhaps she was recalling the way he treated her in 1996?”

I’m sure she was, but it really just came done to the numbers. She didn’t need him so he was out. Same with the Greens, until it all changed when the special votes were counted and seven Greens made it in. This meant Clark no longer had a majority and had to include them in the team.

“In the 2005 election he finally lost the Tauranga seat, though NZ First managed to maintain its hold on enough of the vote to stay in parliament. He entered into a confidence and supply agreement with the Labour-led government, though not a full coalition. (He had nastily stated that he wouldn’t enter into any coalition that included the Greens.)”

Coalition was never on the table. It was always going to be confidence and supply with or without the Greens. Again, the numbers decided. He had one more MP than the Greens and enough for a one seat majority without them. So he could dictate that the Greens would have no Ministers. Unfortunately, Clark didn’t call his bluff, as no way would he have supported a Brash-led govt, though you of course could argue that she couldn’t take the chance having been burnt by the same guy before.

“Anyone who knows anything about New Zealand politics though will tell you never to underestimate Winston Peters. In 2011 he was back.”

Again true, but the Nats know it was their fault too, for how they played the tea pot tape scandal. With two weeks to go, they gave Winston all the air time and that led to his numbers climbing back over 5%.

“However, for years we haven’t been building enough houses to keep up with population growth, which is mostly as a result of immigration.”

That’s not the real problem, as there are lots of houses sitting vacant too. We stupidly allow non-resident aliens to purchase private homes, and don’t have a decent capital gains tax, which has helped cause a huge housing bubble that no major party is brave enough to address. So Kiwis have to compete with rich overseas buyers who don’t want to live here, but just seek a quick capital gain, and houses in Auckland are appreciating $1000/day. It’s insane, but you’re right that immigrants may bear the brunt of the backlash from those who don’t know all of what’s contributing to the problem. And yes, Winston will exploit them for further political gain in 2017.