A selection of minor party leaders who probably won’t be on TVNZ’s debate stage this election (Image: Tina Tiller)

PoliticsAugust 4, 2020

Minor parties hit out at exclusion from TVNZ multi-party debate

Staff Writer

A selection of minor party leaders who probably won’t be on TVNZ’s debate stage this election (Image: Tina Tiller)

With the election campaign about to get under way, minor party leaders are furious at being shut out of one of the biggest possible stages for their policy platforms. Alex Braae reports.

TVNZ’s multi-party election debate is once again the subject of controversy, not because of who will be on the stage, but who won’t.

In an announcement today, TVNZ said that its multi-party debate will include NZ First, the Green Party, and Act – all of whom are currently represented in parliament. But other parties that have turned up in the polls this year will not be invited, including the Māori Party, New Conservatives, and The Opportunities Party.

Māori Party co-leader John Tamihere said plans were being made now to challenge the decision, on the grounds that Māori candidates with a credible path to parliament would be excluded. “Māori are always treated as second class citizens. Brown voices matter.”

Tamihere contended that it was a “straight Bill of Rights Act and Human Rights Act matter,” and that TVNZ had a responsibility “to reflect Māori perspectives, as laid out in ministerial direction.”

Opportunities Party leader Geoff Simmons was equally scathing, describing it as a “kick in the nuts for democracy.”

He said by excluding parties outside of parliament, voters were being denied the opportunity to be exposed to new policies. “Since MMP came in, all new political parties have been offshoots of existing ones. If we want new ideas in Parliament, we need to give a platform to new parties.

“There are ideas out there – plenty of them – but they are not seeing the light of day. That is because they are all being put forward by minor parties.”

New Conservative leader Leighton Baker implied there might be more sinister motives for the exclusion. He said it was “not surprising that some media feel they should control what people hear rather than facilitate the sharing of ideas. Probably why they require government intervention to stay viable.”

In response, TVNZ’s editor of news gathering Phil O’Sullivan said none of those factors applied when it came to the decision for the broadcaster, because above all they needed to apply the criteria fairly.

“We know people are going to be displeased, and that’s always unfortunate in a democracy. The intention of these debates is to try and improve people’s abilities to make sensible decisions in an election. But being fair doesn’t always mean being popular.”

On the specific point about including Māori perspectives, O’Sullivan said the Māori Party itself didn’t meet the criteria. “But that’s not to suggest that stories about the Māori Party aren’t being reflected in One News’ wider election coverage,” he said, noting several recent stories and interviews that had been broadcast on various news programmes. He also pointed to TVNZ’s recently announced Vote Compass site which will include parties polling above 1%.

United Future leader Damian Light, Maori Party co-leader Marama Fox, ACT leader David Seymour and Green Party leader James Shaw meet for the 2017 TVNZ minor parties debate. (TVNZ)

The TVNZ multi-party debate resulted in somewhat farcical scenes in 2017 because of the inclusion of relative unknown United Future leader Damian Light, on the grounds that former leader Peter Dunne held a seat in parliament which he was weeks away from retiring from.

The inclusion criteria was either polling at or above 3% or a seat in parliament, and these criteria will again be used this year. Last time around, this meant then-TOP leader Gareth Morgan wasn’t invited, despite his party polling better than the Māori Party, Act and United Future, who were all on the stage. Morgan took legal action against the exclusion, which failed.

Previous attempts by parties to use the courts to force their way onto the debate stage had been successful, including Peter Dunne and Progressive Coalition leader Jim Anderton in 2005, and Conservative party leader Colin Craig in 2014.

This time around, Opportunities Party leader Geoff Simmons said the party would not be mounting a legal challenge to its exclusion, but was still in talks with TVNZ.

None of the three largest excluded parties have been polling at a level this year that would have allowed them a place on stage in 2017. However, in the most recent One News Colmar-Brunton poll, the New Conservatives at 1.2% were a relatively small margin behind NZ First, at 2.0%.

The Māori Party and Opportunities Party performed less well in this poll, securing 1.0% and 0.1% respectively. Out of all polls taken this year by Colmar-Brunton, their best results are 1.2% and 0.5% respectively.

There are a wide range of other parties also standing in the election who have appeared in Colmar-Brunton polls this year, including Legalise Cannabis, the One Party, Social Credit and the Outdoors Party.

There will also be an opportunity for other parties to force their way into the debate if they score a 3% result in the next Colmar-Brunton poll, which will be the final poll conducted before the debate. “But it’d be fair to say at this stage, it’s going to be quite difficult for them,” said O’Sullivan, noting that there are currently eight registered parties polling below the threshold.

Advance NZ has also not been invited to participate in the debate, despite party co-leader Jami-Lee Ross being in parliament – though he is listed on the parliamentary website as an independent MP. His co-leader Billy Te Kahika, who joined as part of the merger between Advance NZ and the NZ Public Party, recently got 0.7% in the Colmar-Brunton’s preferred PM stakes.

Incidentally, one of the excluded parties might find a stage on a rival channel. Three’s Newshub Nation will be hosting a ‘power-brokers’ debate, which will be open to all parties that have had seats in parliament over the last two terms, meaning the Māori Party will be invited to participate.

a wheelchair in the spotlight in a row of ordinary chairs

The disabled community wants a seat at the election table (Image: Getty Images)

OPINIONPoliticsAugust 4, 2020

Disabled people like me need more than lip service. We need politicians to show up

Michael Pulman

Guest writer

The disabled community wants a seat at the election table (Image: Getty Images)

The disability community should stop making excuses for candidates who don’t take the opportunity to hear from us directly – and that includes the prime minister herself, writes disabled journalist Michael Pulman.

This time four years ago, forums promoting the disability vote gave the politicians who showed up a chance to hear directly about what they could do to improve inequalities faced by the disability community – one that encompasses over a quarter of the total population.

These forums were nothing new, but they gave those who spend their lives tirelessly advocating for the rights of disabled people an opportunity to speak. And they led to some truly stirring moments. Few of us who were there that day in Auckland, for example, could forget when fearless advocate Dr Huhana Hickey grabbed the microphone and gave politicians what-for about how the housing crisis was further growing the divide between the disabled and general population.

But sadly, little from those forums in September 2017 got much over the line. Disabled people got to say their piece, and then a week or two later they cast their votes. Now, three years later, the disability community will soon be talking again about how their voice matters. Already invites are going out to MPs, requesting their presence at events designed to put disability on the agenda this election.

The impetus is now back on the politicians to show up. This is not the time to be making excuses for those who don’t make the effort, even if one of them is the prime minister herself.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting Jacinda Ardern hasn’t been an ally to some in the disability community. She’s appeared in videos practising sign language, and promoted IHC’s IDEA Services during the lockdown, for example. It would be inaccurate to say she’s done completely nothing.

But there is a big difference between appearing on a video screen and actually speaking directly to disabled people who feel marginalised by the very systems the government claims to be putting in place to promote equity.

Remarkably, there are still some within the disability community itself who make excuses for Ardern’s silence – most commonly with the “she’s very busy” line. John Key didn’t get the same pass, nor did Helen Clark before him or Jenny Shipley before her.

Are we judging Ardern fairly or are we simply backing the political brand we pin our hopes on? If we are doing the latter, brace for another three years of uncertainty.

Try to make that same “too busy” excuse to disabled people who struggle to even get out of bed in the morning because they don’t have someone to help them into the shower. Try making it it to the mother of a disabled teenager who battles the schooling system on a daily basis so her child can get a fair go.

Listen to the disability community and they’ll tell you: all they want is an acknowledgment, and maybe just five minutes of Ardern’s time so they don’t feel like they only matter to the MP with the relevant portfolio.

To excuse the prime minister as “too busy” smacks of fandom, of a voter who has climbed happily, unquestioningly on board the Jacindamania hype train. But it goes deeper than that. New Zealand’s disabled community makes up over a quarter of the population. That’s over a million people in the “team of five million”. While not all are eligible voters, and many will choose not to participate, that’s still a hell of a lot of potential votes – perhaps even enough to tilt the election one way or another.

If you want to look at it purely from a political perspective, why wouldn’t the PM see the incentives on offer here? Why aren’t her people bending over backwards to make time for an appearance or two?

I sense that any reluctance on her part, or at least on her office’s part, could be down to discomfort about their own lack of awareness in this area. Call me crazy, but that could well be a good thing. The disability community would absolutely rejoice at hearing the prime minister acknowledge that more work is to be done to make society more equitable for them, to say that further work is to be done for New Zealand to adhere to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

Even if just for a few fleeting moments, the boost from such statements would be enough to show New Zealand’s disabled that the government actually hears them. Silence from the prime minister, on the other hand, will only re-enforce the impression that few in the Beehive place much value on those living on the margins, particularly those close to the poverty line.

Let’s hope that we aren’t having still this conversation in September. By then it will be too late.