
Dunne's Weekly: Oppositions Seldom Win, But Governments Often Lose
Moreover, voters often have short memories. A recent poll showed many people believe it is time for another group of parties to govern in New Zealand, despite it being less than two years since that same group was unceremoniously turfed out of office and does not yet seem to fully appreciate the reasons why. Indeed, although the Opposition has not yet released any specific policy, its general attitude seems to be that it will just pick up where it left off last time and resume the same sort of policy approach and style of government voters rejected so clearly at the last election.
That is why Labour was able to get away last week with criticising the government's handling of the ongoing cost-of-living crisis without offering any alternative of its own, because, frankly, as the Opposition, its views do not matter. Next year's election will be more a referendum on the government's performance than a critique of the Opposition's alternative.
This is not unique to New Zealand. Last year's Labour landslide victory in the British general election was more a repudiation of fourteen years of Conservative rule, than an endorsement of Labour. Now, having rejected the Conservatives so overwhelmingly, and to date being less than impressed with Labour's offering, it is hardly surprising that British voters are flocking in droves to the untried Reform Party.
The New Zealand equivalent of that phenomenon has been the increase in support for minor parties, New Zealand First and the Greens in particular. So much so that the next election, and which parties form the next government, could come down to how well the minor parties perform, rather than the major parties they could be expected to align with in government.
Given that context, it is not altogether surprising that there is mounting speculation the current government could be the country's first one-term government in 50 years. But, so far, the evidence for that happening is not strong. The National/ACT/ New Zealand bloc has led in most opinion polls since the end of 2021. Today, the latest rolling average of polls shows the coalition government ahead of its rivals by just under 4%, and still able to form a majority government. At the same point in the electoral cycle three years ago, the then Labour Government was trailing the then-Opposition National/ACT/ New Zealand bloc by just under 5%.
Nevertheless, National's position is precarious. Its vulnerability, which this column has highlighted many times previously, is its increasing dependence on its coalition partners to get across the electoral line. Until recently, the Prime Minister has shrugged this point aside, saying it is just one of the realities of MMP.
However, in recent weeks there has been a perceptible change in the government's tempo, with a slew of major policy announcements from National in a variety of areas, from a new infrastructure plan, a new funding model for general practices, an end to building open-plan classrooms, and even the controversial changes to electoral enrolment provisions, National has shown a new determination in seeking to dominate the political agenda on its terms. No longer does it seem happy to let its coalition partners control the policy agenda as they appear to have done throughout the government's term.
With the election just over a year away National looks to have moved centre-stage in terms of the government's performance. It knows that to win the next election the coalition government needs to first lock-in the support of those who voted for it last time, before trying to drag in additional other voters from across the political divide. So, National's current moves are a deliberate attempt to claw back supporters who may have deserted it for ACT or New Zealand First, because they have seen them as more boldly defined. Without locking-in that core government support into National's column, National's position will become shakier and its prospects more uncertain.
Things are not quite as challenging for Labour, however. Because it is in its first term in Opposition and because one-term governments are a rarity – only two (both Labour) in the last century – while there may be increasing hope, there is not yet any real expectation that it can win in 2026. That immediately relieves some of the pressure of expectation of returning to office so quickly.
Similarly, because governments lose elections rather than Oppositions win them, the level of scrutiny on Labour's promises will always be less than that on the government's promises. That will change a little as the election nears, but for Labour, right now, the longer it can keep getting away with criticising the government and not offering any constructive alternative, the better.
None of this means a Labour-bloc victory at the next election is unlikely or impossible. With polls showing increasing disapproval of the country's current direction, it must be acknowledged there is a greater chance of this occurring. And yet again, it will be a case of the government losing, rather than the Opposition winning.

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

RNZ News
29 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Curriculum changes delayed after feedback from teachers
Photo: 123RF The government has delayed introducing the new senior secondary school curriculum after feedback from teachers. The change followed warnings the new curriculums were being rushed, and coincided with the government's announcement this week that the NCEA qualification would be phased out from 2028 . The government had originally told schools they would have to teach the new English and maths curriculums for intermediate and secondary schools from the start of next year and new curriculums from other subjects from the start of 2027. But this week the Ministry of Education dropped that timeline and introduced a staggered start. The 2027 date would apply only for students up to Year 10. Those in Year 11 would be taught the new curriculums from 2028, Year 12 from 2029 and Year 13 from 2030. Teachers spoken to by RNZ welcomed the delay, but said work on a new qualification to replace NCEA should wait until after the curriculums were in place. Association of Teachers of English president Pip Tinning said she was happy the curriculum would be phased in. "It is really important to allow teachers time to get their heads around the changes and what's going to need to happen." Auckland Secondary Principals' Association president Claire Amos said teachers were feeling overwhelmed by all of the changes the government was making. She said the government should delay consultation on a new qualification to replace NCEA until work on the curriculums was complete. "We're expected to comment on whether we think an assessment framework change is the right change when we have no idea what it will be assessing." "It's really hard for us to be consulted on the way we might assess something that is invisible to us at the moment." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

1News
an hour ago
- 1News
Govt on next steps to replacing fuel tax with road user charges
Cabinet has agreed on a set of changes as it looks to roll out electronic road user charges to all light vehicles as it seeks to replace petrol tax. A replacement of fuel excise taxes in favour of electronic road user charging is part of National's coalition agreement with ACT. Currently New Zealanders help pay for the roads via their vehicle licence (or 'rego') fee, road user charges (RUC) and the petrol excise duty (PED). Minister of Transport Chris Bishop said the transition will ensure all vehicles pay based on actual road use (including weight) regardless of fuel type. "Right now, New Zealanders pay Fuel Excise Duty (FED, or petrol tax) of about 70c per litre of petrol every time they fill up at the pump with a petrol car. ADVERTISEMENT "Diesel, electric, and heavy vehicles pay road user charges based on distance travelled." Bishop said as hybrid and petrol efficient vehicles become more common, the way New Zealand funds its roads needed to change. He said in 2015, there were 12,000 hybrid vehicles in the country, whereas now, there are over 350,000. "For decades, petrol tax has acted as a rough proxy for road use, but the relationship between petrol consumption and road usage is fast breaking down. Minister of Transport Chris Bishop. (Source: Q and A) "For example, petrol vehicles with better fuel economy contribute less FED per kilometre towards road maintenance, operations, and improvements. "As our vehicle fleet changes, so too must the way we fund our roads. It isn't fair to have Kiwis who drive less and who can't afford a fuel-efficient car paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often." ADVERTISEMENT Timeline Bishop said the transition will happen in stages, beginning with legislative and regulatory reform to modernise the current road user charges system and enable private sector innovation. "The current road user charges system is outdated. It's largely paper based, means people have to constantly monitor their odometers, and requires people to buy road user charges in 1000km chunks." Bishop said he expects to pass legislation in 2026, followed by an updated code of practice for road user charge providers and an upgrade in systems for both New Zealand Transport Agency and police. "By 2027, the RUC system will be 'open for business', with third-party providers able to offer innovative payment services and a consistent approval process in place. "At this stage, no date has been set for the full transition of the light vehicle fleet. That's a deliberate choice, as we're focused on getting the system right rather than rushing its rollout." The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, new report into submersible implosion, body found in Auckland park, and mixed injury news for the Warriors. (Source: 1News) ADVERTISEMENT Key legislative changes the Government is progressing include: Removing the requirement to carry or display road user charge licences, allowing for digital records instead. Enabling the use of a broader range of electronic road user charge devices, including those already built into many modern vehicles. Supporting flexible payment models such as post-pay and monthly billing. Separating NZTA's roles as both road user charge regulator and retailer to foster fairer competition. Allowing bundling of other road charges like tolls and time of used based pricing into a single, easy payment. "The changes will support a more user-friendly, technology-enabled RUC system, with multiple retail options available for motorists," Bishop said. "Eventually, paying for RUC should be like paying a power bill online, or a Netflix subscription. Simple and easy." Who currently pays road user charges? Vehicles that weigh more than 3500kg pay RUC. Lighter vehicles also pay RUC if they are powered by diesel, electricity or another fuel that isn't taxed at its source. ADVERTISEMENT Light electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrids began paying road user charges last year. EVs that weigh more than 3500kg are still exempt from paying RUC, but will start paying them after December 31, 2025. 'Fairer and more efficient' - Motor Industry Association Motor Industry Association chief executive Aimee Wiley is supportive of the Government's plan, which she said will make for "efficient administration and compliance". "Converting the whole fleet to road user charges will be a major undertaking, and we will gain nothing if we do not make use of the latest technology to manage the system digitally and in real time. It'll make compliance much easier and administration less expensive." She said it is the "correct approach" to determine the technology platform for the new system before deciding the approach and timeframe for the transition. Overall, the association, which represents manufacturers and suppliers of new vehicles to New Zealand, said the move "places all vehicles on the same footing, making the system fairer and more efficient".


Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
The Rainbow Warrior Bombing 40 Years On: ‘Re-energising' For Global Peace
The bombing of the Rainbow Warrior on 10 July 1985, with the death of Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira, was a terrible tragedy. But a greater tragedy is the horrendous legacy of Pacific nuclear testing for the people of Rongelap, the Marshall Islands and 'French' Polynesia, the associated military oppression in Kanaky (New Caledonia), and lingering secrecy. Between the United States and France, nearly 300 nuclear weapons were tested, resulting in contamination of indigenous peoples. The British are also to blame. Almost eight decades since the US tests began, a year after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the 'Pacific' nuclear powers have still failed to take full responsibility for the region and adequately compensate victims for the injustices of the past. The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), other pan-Pacific agencies and the Australian and New Zealand governments still have much work ahead. In my new book Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, which reflects on the consequences of the French secret service's bombing of the Greenpeace flagship in Auckland Harbour and the killing of Pereira, I have argued that New Zealand and the PIF states should have vigorously supported the lawsuits of the Republic of the Marshall Islands in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the US Federal courts. This was an opportunity lost. In 2014, the Marshall Islands sued nine world powers. The late Tony deBrum, Marshall Islands Foreign Minister at the time, declared that the lawsuits were a final bid to establish a global conversation on nuclear disarmament. He said: 'Our people have suffered the catastrophic and irreparable damages of these weapons, and we vow to fight so that no one else on Earth will ever again experience these atrocities.' New Zealand and the PIF states should now require full investigations of nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands and French Polynesia to support a more robust compensation program than currently exists. New Zealand and the PIF states also need to take a less ambiguous position on decolonisation in the Pacific, give greater priority to that issue and seek a 're-energising' of the activities of the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation. This is especially important in relation to French Polynesia and Kanaky New Caledonia and, also for Bougainville as it approaches the end of the transitional political autonomy period with a unilateral declaration of independence from Papua New Guinea slated for 1 September 2027. Decolonisation is also a critical issue in New Zealand's relations with Indonesia, particularly in relation to the six Melanesian provinces that make up the region known in the Pacific as 'West Papua' and Indonesia's growing and politically motivated role in the region with respect to climate aid. It is important that New Zealand and the PIF states take a lead from the MSG — at least those states other than Fiji and PNG, which have both been co-opted by Indonesian bribery in the form of economic aid. They should take a more pro-active stance on West Papuan human rights and socio-political development, with a view to encouraging a process of political self-determination and a new, more credible UN-supervised vote replacing the 1969 'Act of No Choice'. With regard to the present-day environmental threat of climate change, it is essential to address the lack of an officially recognised category for 'climate refugee' under international law. It is also important to seek an international framework, convention, protocol and specific guidelines that can provide protection and assistance for people crossing international borders because of climate change. The existing rights guaranteed refugees — specifically the right to international humanitarian assistance and the right of return — must be extended to climate refugees or migrants. This issue should be acted on by the PIF with the Australian and New Zealand governments. More generally, Australia and New Zealand need to respond to Pacific Island countries' concerns over climate change and global warming with a greater sense of urgency and resolve. Vitally important here is the current landmark ICJ case brought by a coalition of 132 countries, initiated by innovative and frustrated law students at the University of the South Pacific's Vanuatu campus, seeking an advisory opinion on the obligations of states over climate crisis. An historic and unanimous opinion delivered by the ICJ on 23 July found that countries must uphold existing international laws related to climate change and, if they fail to act, could be held responsible for damage to communities and the environment. The opinion opens a door for future claims by countries seeking reparations for climate-related harm and has been described by many supporters as 'a turning point for frontline communities everywhere'. Regional and country-specific climate change plans and policies are needed to deal with large numbers of Pacific refugees. This is especially important for New Zealand, as a country with a significant Pacific population (442,632 people or 8.9% according to the 2023 Census) that is well integrated into the national infrastructure, and a country well placed to welcome more Pacific Islanders. In April 2025, the New Zealand Government announced plans to double defence spending as a share of GDP over the next eight years under its long-awaited Defence Capability Plan. However, it appeared the priority was to join a new Donald Trump-inspired global arms race while the country faced no threat, at the expense of the climate change, nuclear-free Pacific and regional peacemaking policies and actions that have forged the country's global reputation. Speculation was also rife about the possibility of New Zealand joining a second tier of the controversial AUKUS security pact between Australia, the UK and the US, which would raise geopolitical tensions with little benefit for the Pacific region. In the prologue to my book, former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark is forthright on this issue as she laments the undermining of the country's independent foreign policy and respect for the international rule of law. In 2003, Clark demonstrated New Zealand's independence by refusing to support an illegal US invasion of Iraq. The wisdom of her stance was revealed by the military quagmire faced by the George W. Bush administration. New Zealand also showed independent leadership with the 2021 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which has now been ratified by 73 states. However, as Clark argues, the global multilateral system is now in crisis — across all its dimensions: The UN Security Council is paralysed by great power tensions. The United States is unlikely to pay its dues to the UN under the Trump presidency, and others are unlikely to fill the substantial gap which that leaves. Its humanitarian, development, health, human rights, political and peacekeeping, scientific and cultural arms all face fiscal crises. This is the time for New Zealand to link with the many small and middle powers across regions who have a vision for a world characterised by solidarity and peace and which can rise to the occasion to combat the existential challenges it faces — including of nuclear weapons, climate change, and artificial intelligence. As Marshall Islands Journal editor Giff Johnson has remarked, the people of Rongelap changed the course of history for Pacific nuclear justice by taking control of their destiny with the help of Greenpeace's Rainbow Warrior. However, the relocation of the islanders four decades ago has revealed that the legacy of nuclear testing remains unfinished business. 'On the fateful last voyage,' reflects Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Dr Russel Norman, 'the crew of the Rainbow Warrior, look at us in black and white through the lens of time, and lay down the wero – the challenge. They faced down a nuclear threat to the habitability of the Pacific. Do we have the courage and wits to face down the biodiversity and climate crises facing humanity, crises that threaten the habitability of planet Earth?' To Ngati Kuri kaumatua Dover Samuels says the Rainbow Warrior was 'probably the biggest battleship that ever traversed the oceans of the world. But she wasn't armed with guns, she was armed with peace'. Dr David Robie travelled as a journalist with the Greenpeace campaigners on their 1985 mission to relocate 320 Rongelap Islanders in the Marshall Islands who had suffered from a legacy of radiation from the 1954 Castle Bravo thermonuclear test and was on board the Rainbow Warrior for almost 11 weeks before the bombing. His book is published by Little Island Press. Dr Robie is speaking on the theme '40 years on, the Rainbow Warrior, the bombing, and French colonial culture in the Pacific' with the Fabian Society at 5.30pm on Friday, August 8, 2025. He will also appear in conversation with Jeremy Rose at the Aro Valley Peace Talks on Saturday, August 9, 2025.