spinofflive
TS04 Metiria header

PoliticsAugust 6, 2019

Watch: Metiria Turei opens up on a life in politics, art and activism in Two Sketches

TS04 Metiria header

At the last election, Metiria Turei stood down as Greens co-leader amid the controversy that followed a personal and polarising speech, the reverberations of which are felt to this day in the party. She has since stayed out of the public spotlight and immersed herself in art and performance. In a rare interview, she sits down with Toby Morris at her Dunedin studio for a spot of drawing – and stitching.

A couple of months before polling day in 2017, Metiria Turei changed the trajectory of the campaign, and very probably the direction of politics in New Zealand. In a speech at the Green Party AGM, the co-leader addressed the state of New Zealand’s welfare system. She recounted her own time on the DPB. And she admitted that she’d lied in order to make ends meet for herself and her daughter.

That speech led to a leap in support for the Greens. That, in turn, saw Labour slump, and its then leader, Andrew Little, stand down. As Jacinda Ardern delivered an unimaginable surge for Labour, it was the Greens’ turn to slump, as news media drilled down into the details of Turei’s past. The government changed, with the Greens for the first time taking their part of power. A casualty of that turnaround, however, was their co-leader. Turei had resigned the co-leadership and her place on the party list. She all but vanished from public life, and enrolled at art school in her Dunedin home.

More than two years on, she does not regret that speech. In her first major interview since the election, with The Spinoff’s Toby Morris as part of the Two Sketches webseries, she said she stood by the speech, its message on behalf those on benefits, and its impact in shaking up the election – despite its “traumatic” effect.

“I’m proud of the speech, I’m really proud of the speech and always will be. I think it was absolutely the right thing to do, and I always will. And I’m proud of the activism that it created. Taking all of that passion and turning it into something really concrete and that’s what needed to happen because those people hadn’t been heard at all for such a long time.

Had the campaign continued in the “same old” fashion, the status quo would have prevailed, she said.

“We got the highest poll the Greens have ever had in the week after my speech. I think something had to happen to make a change of government a possibility, a real possibility.

“As traumatic as it was for a tonne of us, the outcome that I wanted was achieved.”

Asked if she missed the world of politics, Turei said: “Some days I miss it when I see people who are doing certain jobs and think, ‘Oh, you’re doing a shit one. Honestly could you just … We fought really hard to get you fellas in government. Can you please just do it properly?’”

While she enjoyed shouting at the TV, she ruled out a return to parliament. “I wouldn’t go back. Being able to wake up in your own bed and live your own life and not be in such an aggressive environment is just so fantastic. Plus, I just think too that there’s a time when you make your contribution, and you move on. It’s not a job for life, that one – well, OK, for Winston …”

And what of her former colleagues in the Green caucus? “They’re doing good. The new generation of MPs is a whole new beast and thankfully so,” she said.

“I’m really pleased with the resilience of the organisation … When you’ve led an organisation for a real long time you want it to be real strong. And they are, so that’s great. They’re in government, and they’re doing amazing things just like we always promised we would and that’s marvellous.”

She is not in contact with her old colleagues on “a day to day basis” but she did catch up with some of them: “It’s really nice when they come and visit and give me all the gossip.”

“My side is doing a fantastic job – Marama,” she added, name-checking her successor as female co-leader of the party, Marama Davidson. “Other people are doing my job, and they just don’t need me grumping from the back room. It’s a hard enough job to do anyway.”

Turei also reflected on the parliamentary walkout she inspired in late 2015, in protest at the Speaker’s refusal to admonish the then prime minister John Key, over his declaration that MPs who had raised concerns about New Zealand citizens in Australian detention on Christmas Island had been “backing the rapists”.

She and a series of opposition MPs stood, said they were victims of sexual assault and were expelled from the house by the speaker, David Carter.

“For those women who joined me, I think they were incredibly brave because it was something that they just felt really strongly about doing.”

It was, she said, “a real indictment on the parliamentary process that the speaker couldn’t handle it and there was an inability to understand real life. It was really apparent just how incapable the parliamentary system was.”

Turei said she was pleased to see the publication earlier this year of The Francis Report, commissioned by Trevor Mallard, which found that bullying and harassment had become “systemic in the parliamentary workplace”.

“It’s so good. It’s such a good thing for them to be doing. And I know it’s really tricky … It’s never going to be a perfect inquiry, and there never can be. But there are all sorts of stories all the time about behaviour, not necessarily sexual shenanigans or sexual assault behaviour, but just aggressive, shitty behaviour.”

Last year Turei completed a graduate diploma in visual art. “It was fantastic. It’s really scary doing something completely new like this. Making isn’t new, but having people look at it and try to assess whether it’s any good, that’s all new. Thinking about being an artist is completely new.”

She is currently completing a work “about the three Māori babies a week who are stolen by Oranga Tamariki, [about] which I’m quite furious, but trying not to talk, trying to make, and it will be based on the women, on the mothers … I’m trying very hard not to speak politically, but to do art in a political way or at least with some political ideas … I’m trying really hard not to speak politically but to do art in a political way.”

In the Two Sketches series, Morris and a guest chat while each draws a picture. In this latest episode, Turei’s “drawing” is an embroidery, based on her interest in what she describes as “old lady superheroes”.

Two Sketches is made with the support of NZ On Air. Watch earlier episodes, with Michel Mulipola, Sharon Murdoch and Sam Orchard, here. Subscribe to The Spinoff’s YouTube channel here to see all our video series.

Keep going!
National party leader Simon Bridges at the party’s 2019 conference (Radio NZ/Craig McCulloch)
National party leader Simon Bridges at the party’s 2019 conference (Radio NZ/Craig McCulloch)

PoliticsAugust 6, 2019

On euthanasia, National is out of step with its own voters

National party leader Simon Bridges at the party’s 2019 conference (Radio NZ/Craig McCulloch)
National party leader Simon Bridges at the party’s 2019 conference (Radio NZ/Craig McCulloch)

Fervent euthanasia opponent Maggie Barry is giving her party a headache that may last right up to next year’s election.

When Judith Collins tearfully told Parliament during the second reading of David Seymour’s End of Life Choice Bill in June that she had been on “the wrong side” of the debate and now she was on “the right side” by voting in favour, it was impossible not to hear her sniffing the winds of political change.

It has gone mostly unremarked that of the five MPs who are commonly tipped as contenders to replace Simon Bridges as leader — Collins, Paula Bennett, Mark Mitchell, Nikki Kaye and Todd Muller — only Muller voted against the bill in June.

Departing Selwyn MP Amy Adams, who ran Bridges close in last year’s leadership race, also voted for it as did two MPs touted as future leaders — Nicola Willis and Chris Bishop.

Collins is smart and canny. Why would she want to remain not only on the wrong side of a majority of New Zealand voters, but also on the wrong side of a majority of National supporters — especially if she guesses the bill is likely to pass?

A Horizon poll published in May showed 65% of National’s voters approve of an assisted death for anyone with an end-stage terminal illness aged over 18 who is of sound mind and suffering unbearably.

Fifty-eight per cent of National voters also support assisted dying for adults with neuro-degenerative conditions, such as motor neurone disease, and who are suffering unbearably, even if their death may not occur in the immediate future.

However, while nearly all of National’s potential leadership contenders favour assisted dying, the bulk of the party’s MPs are dramatically out of step with the people they represent.

The second reading of the End of Life Choice Bill showed this glaring disjunction very clearly. Two-thirds of National voters want some form of assisted dying but only a third of National’s MPs — 18 out of 55 — voted in favour.

Another worry for National is that North Shore MP Maggie Barry is by far the most prominent opponent in the debate. Her campaign of opposition is often seen as being pursued with a reckless disregard for evidence and couched in exaggerated and inflammatory language.

And that is a problem for Bridges and his party because her aggressive and obstructive stance is unpopular with much of the public and her fellow MPs.

Maggie Barry at Wellington Botanic Gardens, 20 March 2017 (Photo by Mike Clare/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)

Before the End of Life Choice Bill returned to Parliament last week, Judith Collins told journalists that she hoped “people don’t play silly buggers” and abuse the process as it is debated.

Collins didn’t identify the “silly buggers” she was referring to but her comment has been widely interpreted to mean Maggie Barry and her religious allies.

Last Wednesday, hours before David Seymour’s bill was due to be debated, Barry fronted the media — accompanied by National colleagues Simon O’Connor, Chris Penk, Alfred Ngaro and Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi — to reaffirm their intention to lodge more than a hundred amendments.

National Party strategists must wonder what they have done wrong in an earlier life to deserve photos of a posse of their MPs splashed across the news media under headings such as: “Euthanasia critics look to drag out battle in Parliament.”

That banner could easily have read: “National MPs intend to filibuster a very popular bill that even their voters support.”

Barry denied that the 120 amendments they will lodge constitute filibustering. In fact, she doubled down, telling journalists: “I would imagine it could quite easily go beyond that [120] because you can make amendments on amendments.”

Proposing 120 amendments for a bill of only 28 sections is extraordinary but threatening amendments to amendments looks unrepentantly vexatious and a clear example of the abuse of process Collins warned against.

Mike’s Minute, Wednesday, 13 December 2017

National has currently got the wind at its back after a successful party conference and a Colmar Brunton poll that put the party at 45%. What it really doesn’t need right now is months of negative publicity as Barry and her confreres are portrayed in the media as niggling spoilers.

Some of the sharpest critics include those normally sympathetic to National. After last Wednesday’s parliamentary debate, Mike Hosking told his Newstalk ZB audience: “Now, this [debate] ain’t over yet, not by a long way thanks to Maggie Barry and her mates who, despite what she claims, is doing herself no favours by stalling with her 100-plus amendments.”

And it’s not the first time he has criticised her.

At the time of the second reading of the bill in June, when he asked National’s Mark Mitchell what he thought of Barry’s role in the assisted dying debate, the Rodney MP replied: “No comment.”

Hosking later told his Breakfast audience, “When Mark Mitchell says ‘no comment’, you know exactly what he’s thinking. I just wonder… internally, within the party… if she is doing herself a little bit of damage with her stance at the moment.”

Hosking, of course, will know very well from National insiders just how much Barry’s aggressive stance is alienating her colleagues, including some of those who oppose legalisation. She has always been polarising but her crusade against assisted dying has turned the former garden-show host into Roundup on legs in the opinion of many both within and outside Parliament.

The radio host told Mitchell he thought Barry was “giving politicians a bad name” and said: “Even if she doesn’t like [the bill]… there’s not 120 amendments required.”

The North Shore MP’s threat to unleash an avalanche of amendments has been widely seen not only as an attempt to stop the bill or delay its passage, but also to make its criteria so restrictive that it will be more or less unworkable in practice if it does pass.

A big problem with such a diehard stance, of course, is that the bill is not nearly as contentious as the media likes to depict. That much was made clear once again last week when a Colmar-Brunton poll showed 72% of the nation are in favour of assisted dying with only 20% opposed.

That such a substantial majority persists after several years of a vociferous campaign of opposition to Seymour’s bill makes it clear just how popular such a law change would be.

Simon Bridges addresses the 83rd Annual National Party Conference at Christchurch Town Hall. (Photo by Kai Schwoerer/Getty Images)

Simon Bridges voted against the bill at both the first and second readings but he must be very aware of the damage Barry and her allies could do to National if the debate continues to run hot in the media until a referendum is held at the next election.

Bridges told Magic Talk radio in June that he was unhappy with NZ First’s call for a referendum before the bill becomes law — which is a condition of the party’s continued support and would be held at the next election alongside one on marijuana for personal use. “I think if we get to the point where we’re having a number of referendums it becomes very distracting from choosing a government to lead this country into the future.”

There will be no referendum, of course, if the bill is defeated at the third reading.

However, if it is passed and requires a plebiscite to become law, the battle will only intensify as opponents mount a desperate rearguard action to defeat it. And that will suck up a lot of oxygen in an election year.

National will consequently be identified in the run-up to the election as the face of fierce opposition to a popular law reform — and that face will inevitably most often be Barry’s.

Like Bridges, Jacinda Ardern is not in favour of a referendum but has said she would vote for one if it was the only way to get the bill over the line. However, she would undoubtedly also prefer not to have the election campaign dominated by two referendums.

The prime minister, who is firmly in favour of assisted dying, reckons a referendum on assisted dying “isn’t required to ensure that the voice of New Zealanders has been heard and to reflect the will of Parliament and the people they represent” — which could be interpreted as a recommendation for MPs to pass the End of Life Choice Bill with enough of a margin to sidestep Winston Peters’ demand for a plebiscite.

The vote at the second reading was a healthy 70-50 in favour but if the nine NZ First MPs vote against the bill at the third reading because a referendum isn’t approved, that majority would become, on current numbers, wafer thin.

However, the changes Seymour has proposed may make his bill palatable enough to some conservative MPs to win their vote and possibly gain sufficient cross-party support to ensure a healthy majority — which means a referendum could be avoided even if NZ First votes against it.

If that happened, the bill could become law before the end of the year.

There are obviously strong incentives for both Labour and National to sort the issue without letting it drag on to the election. Consequently, it’s quite possible that Judith Collins’ switch to the “right side” of the debate will not be the last Road to Damascus experience we see as MPs try to clear the decks before next year’s election campaigning begins.

Related:

Cheat Sheet: David Seymour’s big push to get the numbers for euthanasia

Politics