NZ First leader Winston Peters. Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images

OPINIONPoliticsJune 22, 2021

Sorry, Grim Reaper. New Zealand First is alive and kicking

Guest writer

NZ First leader Winston Peters. Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images

Winston Peters is up for the fight. A new president is ready to go. If NZ First can avoid the mire of the culture war and deliver a positive message, there’s life in the party yet, writes Josh Van Veen, a NZ First supporter and former parliamentary researcher to Winston Peters.

New Zealand First refuses to die. With just 2.6% of the vote in 2020 its obituary was all but written on election night. Many voters may have forgotten it exists. But over the weekend, around 150 delegates gathered in Auckland for the party’s annual convention. There was an unequivocal, unapologetic and unrelenting commitment to carry on the spirit of NZ First.

It was a decision made clear on Sunday afternoon in an impassioned speech by the leader. Winston Peters returned to form with a broadside against “woke” elites who, he said, support racial separatism and perpetuate “cancel culture”. Of course, Peters’ speech was the main event for journalists. But it was the election of a new president and a younger board that will define what happens next.

Former parliamentary staffer Julian Paul, 33, was elected to the presidency unopposed. Young and Māori, with a lifelong commitment to NZ First, he is one of the true believers. He is part of a troika that kept the party going in the bleak aftermath of October 17. The other two members are former MP and acting president Darroch Ball, and secretary-general Holly Howard. Between them, they have reinvigorated the membership and re-established the party infrastructure that will give NZ First a fighting chance.

According to Newsroom, Peters does not have much time for the new party president. This may be so but Peters has not survived this long in politics without making compromises and working alongside those he does not warm to. In any case, if there was a rift between Peters and the party, it was not evident over the weekend. The trait Peters values most it is loyalty, and Paul has demonstrated that in spades. At the very least he has won over Shane and Dorothy Jones, who remain close to Peters. Mrs Jones was also elected to the board.

It would be a mistake to think that there are no internal divisions, however. An ideological tension has been present since the party’s inception, a reflection of the fact that its original membership came from both Labour and National. During the last parliamentary term this was manifest in the divergent views of Tracey Martin and Clayton Mitchell. While Martin proposed a universal family benefit, for example, Mitchell opposed fair pay agreements.

Neither Martin nor Mitchell are with the party now. But that tension between old-fashioned social democracy and conservatism remains. It is a challenge that Paul and the new board are mindful of. They know that NZ First must never be pigeonholed as “left” or “right” and it will need to rise above the culture war if it is to win back centrist voters. The fatal error in 2020 was to go negative on Labour and appeal to a reactionary sentiment that simply was not there.

It remains to be seen whether Peters himself can offer a more positive vision. He has certainly got it in him. While much of his speech was a diatribe against “Ngāti Woke” and his many enemies, there was more to it than that. “We have been the voice of hundreds of thousands of forgotten New Zealanders when no other party would stand up for them against the system,” Peters declared near the end. He desired a country that was “secure, free, and equal”.

Indeed, fairness and equality of opportunity were recurring themes throughout the speech. But in typical Peters’ fashion this was often couched in negative language. “Some of us – and I want to say this to you in the media – are sick and tired of your paternalism!” He shouted at one point. “Some of us think that everyone is equal! Some of us think that given the tools, the equipment, the chance, the education and the encouragement we can be as good as anybody! That’s our idea of equality!”

Of course, he was talking about the He Puapua agenda. As a Māori, it is clear that Peters has no tolerance for “Critical Race Theory” or the demonisation of Pākeha. Anyone who knows him can attest that Peters sincerely believes in Martin Luther King Junior’s dream of a world where one is not judged for the colour of their skin “but by the content of their character”. It is what most New Zealanders would understand to be anti-racism.

But a negative framing is unlikely to inspire the more than 100,000 voters who abandoned NZ First in 2020. A recent study published in the academic journal Political Science dispels the myth that NZ First voters are reactionary. American political scientist Todd Donovan analysed survey data going back to 1996 and compared trends in support for NZ First with right-wing populist parties around the world, including the US Republican Party. Donovan found no relationship between right-wing ideology and support for NZ First.

In fact, its traditional supporters are probably much closer to the “median voter” than Labour and National strategists are comfortable with. Those who had gravitated to NZ First in 2011-17 were looking for security and a positive vision of the future amid global chaos. In the end it was Jacinda Ardern who fulfilled that need. It explains why a poll in the lead up to election day found that 43% of 2017 NZ First voters intended to vote for Labour; a finding supported by data from TVNZ’s Vote Compass.

In an interview with Mike Hosking on Newstalk ZB yesterday, Peters settled any doubt that he intends to run in 2023. He’d be there, “God willing, if I’m fit and motivated.” It is the closest the 76-year-old has ever come to acknowledging his political mortality. But the impression he gave to members behind closed doors on the weekend was that of a man determined to see NZ First outlive him. Throughout the proceedings he offered counsel, comment and even the occasional grammatical correction.

While much has been made of Shane Jones as a potential successor it appears that Jones is more comfortable in his role as a loyal lieutenant – for now. He and wife Dorothy played a crucial role in organising the convention, which Peters is said to have praised as the most successful in NZ First history. If Peters does choose to bow out, Jones will likely have the support of the party rank and file which he previously lacked as an outsider.

The main challenge for the new party president and his team will be to convince their leader that NZ First must offer an alternative to the culture war, not partake in it. If they can do that NZ First is poised for its most audacious comeback yet.

Follow The Spinoff’s politics podcast Gone By Lunchtime on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast provider.

Keep going!

A protest banner at the Rocket Lab premises in Mt Wellington. Photo: Ollie Neas

PoliticsJune 21, 2021

Mahia residents descend on Auckland to protest Rocket Lab links with US military

Oliver Neas

Contributing writer

A protest banner at the Rocket Lab premises in Mt Wellington. Photo: Ollie Neas

Protesters gathered at Rocket Lab’s Auckland HQ today in opposition to the company’s work with the US military, while the Green Party announced a member’s bill to ban military launches from New Zealand.

Protest songs echoed down a quiet cul-de-sac in Mt Wellington this afternoon, as around 30 people turned out to protest the military work of space company Rocket Lab outside the company’s Auckland headquarters. Green MP Teanau Tuiono told protesters his party would be introducing a member’s bill to parliament to ban the launching of military hardware from New Zealand.

“Rocket Lab has managed to circumvent our international obligations and commitments to peace. This bill will draw a line in the sand,” Tuiono told the protestors.

Rocket Lab has come under increasing pressure in recent months following the launch of a prototype satellite for the US Army in March designed to improve US military targeting capabilities.

A security expert described the launch as putting New Zealand into “the kill chain”, while peace groups issued an open letter calling on the prime minister to intervene. Documents released subsequently under the Official Information Act confirm the satellite “will not be utilised for operations” but will “remain a science and technology demonstration over its lifetime”.,

Those attending the protests included peace activists and locals from Mahia, home to the company’s launch site, such as prominent peace activist and Mahia local Pauline Tangiora, who initially publicly backed Rocket Lab’s activities.

Tangiora told demonstrators she previously had a lot of faith in Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck, “but I don’t have any faith any more”.

“We oppose Rocket Lab in solidarity with mana whenua who are opposed to the military launches,” said Auckland Peace Action spokesperson Eliana Darroch.

Prior to the demonstration, Auckland University physicist Peter Wills and former disarmament minister Matt Robson met privately with Rocket Lab representatives on behalf of the demonstrators to discuss their concerns. “We made it clear that this is against New Zealand’s independent foreign policy, and integrates us into the United States military chain,” Robson told The Spinoff.

“Rocket Lab told us they could separate out the military from the peaceful uses, and that the military payloads launched to date would not be used for targeting. But our viewpoint is that these satellites are integrated into the whole system, and this undermines our independent foreign policy,” he said.

“As a former minister for disarmament and arms control I am deeply concerned, because my job was to make sure things like this didn’t happen. It’s against both the spirit and the letter of the nuclear free legislation, and also our commitment to the peaceful use of outer space.”

Law change could rule out major Rocket Lab client base

Under New Zealand’s space law, the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Act, all satellites must be approved by the economic development minister, who is currently Stuart Nash.

The Greens’ proposed amendment would prevent the minister from approving a payload unless satisfied that it does not contain any “military hardware”. The bill defines “military hardware” as “weapons, equipment, machinery, or any other thing intended for use for military purposes by any armed force, paramilitary force, police force, or militia.”

Tuiono told The Spinoff that the bill would rule out payloads such as the Gunsmoke-J. “I would like to stop anything that is going to enable the killing of people in other countries from being launched,” he said.

It could also rule out private intelligence satellites that sell data to US military and intelligence agencies, Tuiono said. Such companies, such as the Peter Thiel backed company Blacksky, are a major customer base for Rocket Lab.

Both Rocket Lab and the New Zealand government have emphasised previously that some military technology benefits society, such as GPS which is operated by the US Air Force. It is not clear whether satellites of this kind would be permitted under the proposed law.

Tuiono acknowledged that some military payloads fell into a “grey area”, saying that he hoped the line would be “teased out at select committee”.

Rocket Lab has worked for US military agencies for over a decade, has received investment from the CIA’s venture capital firm, and has launched payloads for military or intelligence agencies on eight different missions since 2018. Around 30% of Rocket Lab’s business is for defence agencies, according to investment documents.

Most of the military satellites launched by Rocket Lab have been research and development satellites or technology demonstrations, but the purpose and capabilities of some satellites remain secret. The government has also said it expects to approve “operational” military satellites at some point.

Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck has said on numerous occasions that his company will not launch weapons, and has defended its military work as contributing to New Zealand’s national security. Both Beck and the New Zealand government have argued that military technology also benefits society, such as GPS which is operated by the US Air Force.

Because it is a member’s bill, parliament will only vote to advance the legislation if it is drawn from the ballot. Tuiono says he is unsure of what support the bill might receive from National and Labour, which have both been vocal in supporting Rocket Lab’s activities.

Economic development minister Stuart Nash declined to comment on the protests, but has previously said that he would not approve any payload if he assessed that it would contribute to a nuclear weapons programme.

Rocket Lab has been approached for comment.