
With so many parties 'ruling out' working with each other, is MMP losing its way?
There has been a lot of "ruling out" going on in New Zealand politics lately. In the most recent outbreak, both the incoming and outgoing deputy prime ministers, ACT's David Seymour and NZ First's Winston Peters,
ruled out ever working with the Labour Party
.
Seymour has also advised Labour to
rule out working with Te Pāti Māori
. Labour leader Chris Hipkins has
engaged in some ruling out of his own
, indicating he won't work with Winston Peters again. Before the last election, National's Christopher Luxon
ruled out working with Te Pāti Māori
.
And while the Greens haven't yet formally ruled anyone out, co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has said they
could only work with National
if it was prepared to "completely U-turn on their callous, cruel cuts to climate, to science, to people's wellbeing".
Much more of this and at next year's general election New Zealanders will effectively face the same scenario they confronted routinely under electoral rules the country rejected over 30 years ago.
Under the old "first past the post" system, there was only ever one choice: voters could turn either left or right. Many hoped Mixed Member Proportional representation (
MMP
), used for the first time in 1996, would end this ideological forced choice.
Assuming enough voters supported parties other than National and Labour, the two traditional behemoths would have to negotiate rather than impose a governing agenda. Compromise between and within parties would be necessary.
By the 1990s, many had tired of doctrinaire governments happy to swing the policy pendulum from right to left and back again. In theory, MMP prised open a space for a centrist party which might be able to govern with either major player.
In a constitutional context where the political executive has been described as an "
elected dictatorship
", part of the appeal of MMP was that it might constrain some of its worst excesses. Right now, that is starting to look a little naive.
For one thing, the current National-led coalition is behaving with the government-by-decree style associated with the radical, reforming Labour and National administrations of the 1980s and 1990s.
Most notably, the coalition has made
greater use of Parliamentary urgency
than any other government in recent history, wielding its majority to
avoid Parliamentary and public scrutiny
of contentious policies such as the
Pay Equity Amendment Bill
.
Second, in an ironic vindication of
the anti-MMP campaign
's fears before the electoral system was changed - that small parties would exert outsized influence on government policy - the two smaller coalition partners appear to be doing just that.
It is neither possible nor desirable to quantify the degree of sway a smaller partner in a coalition should have. That is a political question, not a technical one.
But some of the administration's most unpopular or contentious policies have emerged from ACT (
the Treaty Principles Bill
and the
Regulatory Standards legislation
) and NZ First (
tax breaks for heated tobacco products
).
Rightly or wrongly, this has created a perception of weakness on the part of the National Party and the prime minister. Of greater concern, perhaps, is the risk the
controversial changes
ACT and NZ First have managed to secure will erode - at least in some quarters - faith in the legitimacy of our electoral arrangements.
Lastly, the party system seems to be settling into a two-bloc configuration: National/ACT/NZ First on the right, and Labour/Greens/Te Pāti Māori on the left.
In both blocs, the two major parties sit closer to the centre than the smaller parties. True, NZ First has tried to brand itself as a moderate "common sense" party, and has worked with both National and Labour, but that is not its position now.
In both blocs, too, the combined strength of the smaller parties is
roughly half that of the major player
. The Greens, Te Pāti Māori, NZ First and ACT may be small, but they are not minor.
In effect, the absence of a genuinely moderate centre party has meant a return to the zero-sum politics of the pre-MMP era. It has also handed considerable leverage to smaller parties on both the left and right of the political spectrum.
Furthermore, if the combined two-party share of the vote captured by National and Labour continues to fall (as the
latest polls show
), and those parties have nowhere else to turn, small party influence will increase.
For some, of course, this may be a good thing. But to those with memories of the executive-centric,
winner-takes-all politics
of the 1980s and 1990s, it is starting to look all too familiar.
The re-emergence of a binary ideological choice might even suggest New Zealand - lacking the
constitutional guardrails
common in other democracies - needs to look beyond MMP for other ways to limit the power of its governments.
* Richard Shaw is a Professor of Politics at Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa - Massey University
-
This story
originally appeared on The Conversation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Peters challenged on tobacco links
Public health researchers at the University of Otago have called on the prime minister to show some leadership and remove the tobacco and vaping portfolio from New Zealand First, following allegations the party has been colluding with tobacco giant Philip Morris. Documents from a Radio NZ investigation show Philip Morris provided NZ First with a draft piece of regulation which the deputy prime minister at the time, Winston Peters, supported. They show NZ First assured Philip Morris they would "put that draft into the policy mix". Mr Peters said the documents referenced were more than six years old, and the attempt to attack NZ First was "old, stale, repetitive, and utterly baseless". The allegation comes after NZ First list MP and Associate Health Minister Casey Costello led the repeal of the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Act 2022. It effectively scrapped laws aimed at slashing tobacco retailers, removing 95% of the nicotine from cigarettes, and creating a smokefree generation by banning sales to those born after 2009. University of Otago Aspire Aotearoa Research Centre co-director and public health researcher Prof Janet Hoek said the fact the documents were six years old was "neither here nor there", because NZ First had repeatedly denied having any connections with the tobacco industry. The revelation raised questions about how easily companies were able to access politicians, and the kind of lobbying that went on behind closed doors. "The challenge that he [Mr Peters] has to address is that there have been allegations that he's been dealing with tobacco companies and using their documents to inform policy. "None of his statements, none of his rebuttals, address that concern. "What we need is some transparency — some actual evidence showing that these allegations that have been put forth in the documents don't stand, and that's not what he's been able to provide. "I think he really needs to be held to account here." She said Mr Peters' instinctive response was "attack is the best defence". "I think there's actually a real question about integrity of the political process here, and what people want to feel is that politicians are acting in the best interest of the country, not the best interest of the tobacco company." Prof Hoek said the "discrepancy" was further decreasing trust in the government, and called on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to assert some leadership and removed the tobacco and vaping portfolio from NZ First, and entrust it to a politician without alleged links to tobacco giants. "We know that tobacco companies operate in the shadows by lobbying politicians. "What these documents reveal are claims that tobacco companies are not just lobbying, they are writing policy. "The New Zealand public will be disgusted to learn that is how the party that should be promoting public health is allegedly behaving." Fellow Aspire co-director Prof Richard Edwards said the repeal of New Zealand's world-leading smokefree legislation prompted a huge outcry from communities affected by smoking, health organisations, health professionals and public health experts. "The repeal raised questions about influence of the tobacco industry. "Subsequent industry-friendly policies like tax cuts for heated tobacco products only increased those concerns, and the recent revelations of close links between NZ First and Philip Morris suggest these concerns were well-founded." He called for the urgent reintroduction of the repealed measures, which were very likely to rapidly reduce the enormous harm from smoking, and protect future generations from smoking. Asked to respond to the accusations, a spokesman for Mr Peters pointed to a social media post online. In it, Mr Peters said the documents referenced were more than six years old, and the "attempt to attack NZ First is old, stale, repetitive, and utterly baseless". He said multiple government departments had themselves proactively reached out to "big tobacco" for direct feedback and advice on tobacco legislation. He accused Radio NZ of being "clearly lefty biased", and their "bottom-of-the-barrel attack reporting" had caused New Zealanders to lose trust in them and switch to other stations. "The smokefree legislation that we implemented is working," he said. "New Zealand First is proud of the smokefree legislation, which is backed by Action for Smokefree 2025 (ASH), that we have implemented and that we are still implementing."


Scoop
15 hours ago
- Scoop
MoE Advice Reveals Cost-Cutting Takes Priority Over Quality In ECE
Newly released advice from the Ministry of Education to Minister David Seymour shows the Government is more focused on helping ECE providers cut costs than on making sure young children get high-quality, safe accessible early learning. In the document Options to reduce ECE service staffing costs, four options were provided (three of which remain redacted), all aimed at cutting the most significant cost for providers: staff wages. One of those options which has recently been implemented, allows employers to pay new teachers the minimum starting rate, regardless of their qualifications or experience. 'This advice confirms what we feared, that cost savings for providers are being prioritised over children's learning and wellbeing,' says Kathy Wolfe, Chief Executive of Te Rito Maioha Early Childhood New Zealand. 'Reducing pay for qualified teachers not only undermines professional standards, but it also risks deterring future teachers from joining the sector. Is this really what the Minister and Associate Minister of Education want? We were told their goal was to lift education outcomes and that journey begins in early childhood.' The Ministry's advice, requested by Minister Seymour, states that this cost-cutting measure is expected to save providers up to $22 million over two years. It also acknowledges the serious risks associated with this approach. 'The Ministry's own words say it all, this move makes ECE teaching 'less attractive for those considering studying and entering the workforce',' says Cathy Wilson, Chief Executive of Montessori Aotearoa New Zealand. 'We're already in a teacher workforce shortage and need to attract more teachers and retain a higher number of teachers. How can we expect to maintain a high-quality system when we devalue the people who deliver it? This short-term thinking will only create bigger problems, with fewer qualified teachers, more instability in the workforce, and a greater risk to children's safety and well-being. How does that help prepare tamariki for school?' Even more concerning is the Government's apparent intention to abandon the Pay Parity scheme. This initiative links the pay of ECE teachers in education and care centres to that of kindergarten teachers, who are funded directly by the government and have pay parity with primary teachers. The system was designed to ensure fairness across the teaching profession, recognising experience and qualifications whether a teacher is in ECE, primary, or secondary education. 'Teachers are teachers, whether they're working with infants, children, or teenagers,' says Mrs Wilson. 'Undermining the pay and conditions of ECE teachers sends a clear message that their work is valued less. That's not only short-sighted, but it's also damaging for teachers, tamariki, and whānau alike.' The implications are serious. In wealthier communities, providers may simply pass increased costs on to parents who can pay. In lower-income communities, however, providers will be more likely to cut wages, reduce qualified staff, or take advantage of any future changes that lower the minimum qualification requirements, effectively creating a two-tier ECE system. 'We're staring down the barrel of deepening inequity in early childhood education,' says Mrs Wolfe. 'If qualification requirements are relaxed and pay is suppressed, the quality of teaching in some demographic areas will decline, and with it, outcomes for tamariki.' This direction, Mrs Wolfe warns, will increase teacher turnover, shrink the future workforce, and accelerate the decline of New Zealand's globally recognised high-quality ECE. 'It is horrifying to see our world-leading early childhood education undermined in the name of short-term savings,' she says. 'Our tamariki deserve qualified, well-supported teachers. They deserve safe, rich learning environments. And parents deserve to know that their children are safe and getting the best possible start in life, no matter their postcode.' Te Rito Maioha and Montessori Aotearoa New Zealand are calling on the Government to reverse this direction and invest in quality, not cuts. 'The funding review is underway; however it already seems to have been undermined, and the Minister's outcome predetermined. We urge the Government to properly fund ECE, not by slashing teacher pay or lowering standards, but recognising the vital role teachers play and committing to equity and excellence for every child,' Mrs Wolfe says. Notes: The advice requested by Minister Seymour was based on the knowledge that the ECE sector would receive only a 0.5% funding increase in Budget 2025, well below the 2.5% rate of inflation. The Ministry's paper acknowledges this shortfall would place significant financial pressure on providers. In response, the Minister specifically asked for advice on how to reduce the sector's largest cost: teachers. The ECE sector has already experienced a multi-year funding freeze prior to 2017 under the then National government leaving the sector approximately 11% behind CPI over the last 10 to 15 years. ECE is considered a public good with investment outweighing the costs. For more information on the need to sufficiently fund ECE services About Te Rito Maioha: Te Rito Maioha Early Childhood New Zealand is a leader in early childhood and primary education – growing teachers, leaders, knowledge and bicultural practice so every child learns and thrives. As a membership organisation we are a strong voice for young children and quality education, advocating for the ECE sector and connecting our members with the latest sector-related issues, policy and professional development. As a specialist tertiary provider, we grow valued teachers, educators, leaders and experts with diploma, degree and postgraduate qualifications in early childhood and primary education.


Scoop
17 hours ago
- Scoop
PM Must Act To End Tobacco Industry Interference In His Government
Health Coalition Aotearoa is calling on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to show leadership and strip NZ First of the tobacco and vaping portfolio, following damning revelations of collusion between NZ First and tobacco giant Philip Morris. A detailed RNZ investigation uncovered documents showing Philip Morris provided NZ First with a draft piece of regulation which the Deputy Prime Minister at the time Winston Peters supported. Winston Peters was described by JUUL representatives as "industry friendly and highly geared towards commercial interests." NZ First reportedly assured Philip Morris they would "put that draft into the policy mix." The World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which New Zealand signed in 2005, explicitly warns of the "irreconcilable conflict" between the goals of public health and the interests of the tobacco industry. Under this treaty, governments must protect health policy from tobacco industry interference. "By allowing tobacco industry influence, this Government is breaching its obligations under the World Health Organization convention, says Professor Chris Bullen, Health Coalition Aotearoa tobacco spokesperson and University of Auckland professor. "These documents confirm what many have long feared: tobacco companies are influencing health policy in Aotearoa. The Prime Minister must demonstrate he expects the highest standards of integrity from his Ministers and reallocate the tobacco and vaping portfolio," says Professor Bullen. Tobacco companies' intensive and covert lobbying comes as no surprise. However, evidence NZ First MPs have been complicit in these arrangements will shock the public, who expect higher standards from politicians. The evidence in the media today gives an explicit example of how officials are exposed to communications, meetings and relationships with a powerful industry on policy that is supposed to be protecting public health. And yet another example of this Government favouring commercial interests over people's lives and health. Winston Peters told reporters yesterday "I've always been industry friendly". Matching rhetoric of NZ First Minister Shane Jones last year confirmed Philip Morris External Relations Manager Api Dawson was involved in 'soundings' about the party's tobacco policy. Professor Bullen says the revelations offer Luxon a clear opportunity to put New Zealanders' health ahead of dirty politics. "This is a test of leadership. He must reassign the tobacco and vaping portfolio to someone with no ties to the industry. New Zealanders expect transparency and a Government that acts with integrity. "The Government has already damaged Aotearoa New Zealand's international standing by repealing popular, widely acclaimed smokefree measures - a move that has seen a stall in the decline of smoking prevalence, while inequities persist. "The RNZ revelations show serious lack of judgement by this Government. It must end now. We are spending billions treating preventable diseases caused by smoking, while politicians allow the industry to keep selling the products that cause these harms. It's reckless and it's wrong," says Professor Bullen. Health Coalition Aotearoa is calling for: Immediate reassignment of the tobacco and vaping portfolio from NZ First to a politician free of any ties to the industry, and who will prioritise New Zealanders' health over corporate profits. The Ministry of Health to exclude the nicotine industry from policy processes, interact only when necessary, and document all interactions in alignment with the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, to which Aotearoa is a Party. Stronger rules on lobbying and conflicts of interest across government. Health Coalition Aotearoa is running a campaign to mitigate the harmful impact of industry involvement in public health policy. The Government to prioritise the advice and expertise of those working to reduce tobacco and nicotine harm when changing tobacco policies. "All the current Government's coalition parties have links to the tobacco industry. That must end," said Professor Bullen. "The Prime Minister has a choice: run a government based on integrity or stoop to a new level of dirty politics. He must act now."