PoliticsOctober 5, 2017

Is there room for two Green parties in parliament?

Contributing writer

The speculation about a Greens-National coalition is futile given the tribalism of New Zealand politics, writes former National cabinet minister Wayne Mapp. Instead, he wonders if a revitalised TOP can become a second, centrist Green party.

All the discussion about a possible National/Green coalition reminded me just how much political parties are tribes. They are not just a group of individuals with similar political views. They also typically share a common social construct. This is why a National/Green coalition is highly unlikely – not just now, but also in the future.

It might seem facile to say that most members of political parties have similar backgrounds. But it is an important truth. It may provide some guide as to what might happen in the next few weeks.

In National: business people, farmers and professionals serving business predominate among their members of parliament. In Labour: the university common room, teachers and state servants figure strongly. Of course there always exceptions in the two major parties. National usually has some academics, just as Labour always has some business people. The Greens are younger and are typically urban professionals, or have come from an activist background. New Zealand First resembles National, though perhaps without the connection to larger international businesses.

It is not just political parties that build around particular relationships, so do many of us. I recall as an MP a constituent saying to me she knew no one who was going to vote Labour. More recently, in respect of my article as to why the vote was flowing away from Jacinda Ardern, a number of commenters said that could not possibly be true; they knew no-one who was going to vote National.

Of course many of us have much wider networks among both friends and family. On my wife’s side, at one stage she had three relatives who were MPs in three different parties. Of course one of those relatives was me. In reality, even those who think they know no one who voted for the “opposition” will likely be surprised at their relatives and friends actual voting patterns. We are a small enough, and healthy enough society to have diverse connections.

All this plays into the relevance of the current flurry of articles and discussion about the prospects of a National/Green coalition. It is highly unlikely to take place, certainly not in this electoral cycle. The network of Green activists and supporters come from a very different place to National. Many are ex-Alliance or from parties even further to the left. The thought of a coalition with National, no matter what the quality of the deal, is anathema. On that basis the Greens are permanently wedded to Labour, with all the attendant disadvantages of only being able to go one way.

Guy Salmon has mooted the possibility of TOP being able to be a more centrist Green party. Is this actually feasible?

Actually yes, at least if there is a three or six year plan. Modern politics has given credence to the flamboyant and eccentric leader, and Gareth Morgan certainly fits that bill. Perhaps he might need to tone down some of his musings, but there is no doubt that he is the driving force of TOP.

In 2017 the Green Party got 5.9% of the vote and TOP 2.2%, a total of 8.1%, substantially less than the peak of 11% which the Greens have achieved in the past. It is at least arguable there is space for two ‘green’ parties in parliament, both around 5 to 6% of the vote. One would be the current “red” Greens permanently wedded to the left. The other, built around TOP, would be more centrist party primarily focused on the environment, able to deal with either the left or right of politics. Neither would be wholly environmental. Their main players have interests wider than that. However, this is all an issue for the future.

The main event in this election is New Zealand First. A conservative party of provincial New Zealand. It is not a right party, but rather a populist party drawing support from both left and right.

Which way will it go? Are there any indicators? The New Zealand First MPs are more like National MPs, but they are not National. A number have Labour origins.

Perhaps the most important factor is that National got 46% compared to Labour’s 36%. It is a big margin. Even the combination of Labour and the Greens is still 5% shy of National. That is why this election does not seem like a change election to me. Change elections are like 1999 and 2008 when the main opposition party clearly beats the main governing party.

National will argue that a National – New Zealand First government with a prime minister having gained electoral authority is the easiest option. It will be able to present a new agenda to the people of New Zealand. And in 2020 be judged on the success of that programme. That agenda will include a much bigger role for the regions, with more focus on infrastructure and lifting living standards, especially for those currently on the margins.

However, the reality is that Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens can also command a majority in Parliament. It is possible for them to form a government. A government that will also have a major role in the regions. But likely with more social and environmental spending than the National New Zealand First alternative.

Winston will play this close. It will not be easy for the public to discern the most influential factors on his decision until after the fact.

In the meantime we can all speculate.

Keep going!

PoliticsOctober 4, 2017

Screw parliament: how you can create political change right now

Brodie Fraser

Guest writer

A lot of us are feeling disillusioned with parliamentary politics at the moment – and in another three years, we’ll go through this whole drawn out, messy, process again. So what do we do in the meantime? Brodie Fraser has some suggestions.

The 2017 election campaign was a pretty nasty one – it felt like all that our politicians did was argue over whether or not all New Zealander’s should be afforded Human Rights (such as secure housing, to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, and to be able to vote), and whether or not people deserve social security provided to them by the government.

Politics is an all-encompassing part of life. To me, politics is not just parliamentary politics; it is a combination of our individual actions, the work of our communities, and the work of formal institutions (such as central and local government). Politics can be seen an enacted in the everyday; it does not exist purely in the formal realm.

While voting in an election every few years is a relatively simple form of participation, it should not exist as the be all and end all of political participation. Participation can include voting, activism, education, volunteering, the conversations we have with others, and so much more! Much of what we do can be considered political, even if we do not view it that way.

Voting is, of course, incredibly important. It is a right that many people across the world are not afforded; we are lucky to live in a country with a stable democracy and enfranchisement for almost all of our citizens. However, voter turnout is consistently decreasing across a number of western democracies and New Zealand is no exception. During this election cycle, we did see discussions about this – particularly the disproportionately low rates of turnout amongst younger cohorts of voters. These are worthy conversations to be having, but it’s also necessary to think about other questions: how we might transform our democracy to make it more appealing for everyone to participate in, the other ways in which people participate in politics, and whether or not we can further entrench and privilege these alternative forms of participation.

Voters queue at an early voting booth at Britomart, Auckland, September 2017. Photo: Simon Wilson

Political scientist David van Reybrouck has written a great book about how voting is not necessarily the best form of political participation for modern democracies. Voting is not something we do all that frequently, and finding the information to make an informed vote can be overwhelming. The act of voting in an election does not often lead to sustained, long-term participation once an election is over. Alongside this, elections are adversarial, which can be off-putting for a number of people. Politics is so much more than old white guys arguing with each other, but parliamentary politics would have you think otherwise. Politics can be enjoyable and meaningful! Currently, though, our norms of participation don’t reflect this.

We need to have discussions about how we want our democracy to work, and what forms of participation work best for our diverse little country. To me, this conversation should start with talking about and engaging in forms of other forms of political participation beyond voting. So, what else is there to do aside from voting?

For those interested in parliamentary politics, you can join a political party, volunteer for a party or a particular MP. If it’s a particular cause you care about, you can start a petition – though you will eventually need to find a supportive MP who can accept the petition. You can also keep an eye out on what Select Committees are taking public submissions; this can be done online, in person, or by written letter. And you can, of course, contact an MP. On a more local level, you can also get involved in local government and find opportunities to engage with your local council.

On the individual action side of things, the first thing to do is to make sure you’ve joined your relevant union! Unions do really great things for individual workers and the workforce as a whole. Also – studies have found that unionised workers are more likely to earn higher wages over their lifetime than non-unionised workers. You can also educate yourself and be inspired by all the activists whose shoulder we stand on; there’s lots of digestible and accessible information online. On the long-term side of things, you can form habits that align with your values. This might be by consciously being more compassionate towards others, reducing the amount of plastic waste you produce, relying less on fossil fuels, ditching fast fashion to buy ethically or second-hand, reducing the amount of meat you eat, and so on. Finally, if you have the resources, you can donate money or resources to a charity you support.

If you want to get involved in community lead change, there’s even more you can do! You can join your local community garden (or start your own – it can even be a windowsill herb garden). If you have the time, volunteering for a charity you support or joining an activist group is both rewarding, and a good way to meet people you might not otherwise befriend. It’s pretty easy to find charities and activist organisations relating to just about anything, and social media is making it even easier to reach people. If you can’t find an organisation that suits the type of change you want to create, there’s also a wealth of material online about how to establish your own organisation.

Creating effective political change requires us to have a wide range of tools at our disposal – we must remember not to rely entirely on one method.

Brodie Fraser is a PhD candidate at the University of Otago, Wellington. She holds a Master of Political Science (with a focus on participation) from Victoria University of Wellington, and was co-awarded the Speaker’s Prize for 2016.