5 April 2002
Commentors On MMP Talking Through A Hole In Their Heads
Recent commentary on the comparisons between the Alliance debacle and New Zealand First are in the main cases of
commentators talking through a hole in their heads – the wrong one.
The fact is that the Coalition Government of National and New Zealand First collapsed in August 1998 because the then
Prime Minister and the National Party set out to break the Coalition Agreement with the support of some establishment
and media interests who never ever wanted to come to terms with MMP.
The facts are; in 1996 a comprehensive coalition agreement was signed setting out the budgetary and social programme for
three years. The then Prime Minister Jim Bolger and myself as Deputy Prime Minister shook hands and set aside our
differences to ensure a stable Government, even through the Asian crisis.
The second fact is that Jenny Shipley campaigned against Jim Bolger for the leadership on the clear strategy to change
an agreement she had signed up to. During the 1998 budgetary round Mrs Shipley tried to get me to lower payments to
superannuitants down to 60%. When I refused she told me that “this could be a coalition breaker”. My response to that
was that neither National or New Zealand First had ever threatened to do such a thing and if that was her view “so be
it”. Behind my back she had approached a number of New Zealand First MPs in an attempt to lure them to her cause which
in the first instance was to sell the Wellington Airport to majority overseas interests. The Cabinet Papers reflect that
and because the coalition agreement specifically forbade it I and some of my colleagues were not prepared to wear it. We
had campaigned against Asset Sales in 1996, the Coalition Agreement reflected that, and Mrs Shipley plainly wanted us to
go back on our word.
Moreover, as evidence of this, within six weeks of the coalition collapsing Mrs Shipley’s minority government on 1
October 1998 cut super payments to 60% of the average working wage, sold off Contact Energy, changed the tariff regime,
and began a round of social expenditure cuts. All of those things she wanted me to do when we were in Government. I
refused and to paint that as being “difficult to work with,” is to praise deceit and criticise integrity.
She had no mandate to do any of those things and took her party to the worst result in the 1999 election since it was
formed in 1936.
To compare those events with what is happening now is simply ridiculous.
We who remain in New Zealand First did the honourable thing; we gave up the baubles of office, took demotion, pay and
funding cuts on a matter of principle. We are proud of that. To liken that to the dishonourable behaviour of both the
Government and the Alliance today reflects a deplorable lack of professionalism on the part of commentators who should
know better but who clearly would not know a principle if it jumped up and bit them.
Those commentators who have blithely sought to paint me and my loyal colleagues as difficult to work with are simply
ignoring the plain facts and giving voice to their banal bias. Professor Roberts (NZPA–5 April) from Victoria University
is one of them. Obviously political integrity means little to him and others. Personality politics had nothing to do
with it and one has to ask why these commentators so casually ignore the facts preferring instead to continue their
track record of making mindless statements without substance.
If they want to be so political why don’t they leave their ivory towers and stand for Parliament themselves, although
the outcome would be predictable – puny defeat!
ENDS