According to Talbot Mills polling records back to 1996, the party averages 1.2 per cent higher on election day compared to the previous November.
Taking this month’s poll, that would translate to a 2023 election result of 5.6 per cent.
Of course, when it comes to predicting the future, political commentators exist to make weather forecasters look good.
History and the law of averages are poor guides. Politics is both dynamic and volatile.
That’s what makes National’s job so hard.
When mapping out all viable paths to victory in 2023, the problem for National’s strategists is that some permutations require NZ First, and some don’t.
Christopher Luxon therefore has a choice. Does he explicitly rule out NZ First, like John Key did ahead of the 2008 election, or does he take the 2017 approach and simply hope for the best?
Key’s 2008 move was a bold, calculated risk that demonstrated that his currency trading skills were neatly transferrable to politics.
However, ruling out Peters publicly was only half the job. The strategy also involved an orchestrated and relentless series of political attacks on his party.
It worked. NZ First dipped to 4.1 per cent and Key formed a four-way minority government with Act, United Future and the Māori Party.
Had NZ First stayed above 5 per cent, Labour had a mathematical chance of securing a fourth term with the help of NZ First, the Greens and the Māori Party. Although the relationship between the 2008 Māori Party and the 2008 Labour Party would surely have made the experience unbearable for everyone involved.
In preparation for the 2017 election, Labour took a very different approach.
Labour’s low polling prior to Jacinda Ardern taking over meant it was a given that Labour would need both the Greens and NZ First to form a government.
Although Labour’s path to victory made the final scenes in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom look easy, work commenced on building a trusting relationship with NZ First regardless.
After Key resigned in late 2016, it seemed obvious that National might also end up needing NZ First. That is why National’s passive-aggressive behaviour towards the party in 2017 was so perplexing.
Five years later, National finds itself in a similar position.
With NZ First approaching 5 per cent, the dilemma facing Luxon is that on its own, publicly ruling out Peters might not be enough.
Like 2008, National would need to launch a full assault on Peters to get the job done. A 2017-style half-pie approach would risk Peters returning to Parliament.
Were that to happen, Peters’ revenge on National would surely come in the form of dishes served cold, warm and hot.
Even if National takes an agnostic approach to NZ First next year, it is difficult to imagine a National-Act-NZ First coalition working, given the reservoir of animosity built up over the years.
Until yesterday, it was assumed that while Labour and NZ First didn’t always see eye to eye, at least they could work together.
However, Winston Peters’ extraordinary interview with Audrey Young in yesterday’s Weekend Herald appeared to blow that to bits.
Peters is now saying he will not work with Labour under the current leadership.
It remains unclear whether that also rules out a confidence and supply agreement, or whether the pledge would hold if it meant forcing the country to have another election.
Regardless of all the pre-election positioning, MPs from both sides of the House would be wise to book flights to Kerikeri. Just don’t forget the crayfish.
Andrew Kirton was Labour’s General Secretary from 2016-2018. He now works in government relations for transtasman firm Anacta Consulting. He is married to a Labour MP.
