Both Labour and the Greens have good ideas, and worthwhile causes and portfolios to pursue. PHOTO/FILE
Both Labour and the Greens have good ideas, and worthwhile causes and portfolios to pursue. PHOTO/FILE
NZ FIRST leader Winston Peters has described the Labour-Greens partnership as "worthless".
Well, no it's not, Mr Peters -- but I will concede some doubt over its potential to unseat the National government next year.
It's going to be a tricky relationship because over the past six years the Greenshave been getting used to the heady idea of having lots of MPs, thanks to a decent party vote dished out to them each election. I have sometimes wondered if, among leftist voters, it's trendy, and perhaps a nod to one's tree-hugging conscience, to give a party vote to the Greens while supporting a Labour candidate. Or a National or NZ First candidate, for that matter. In marginal seats, which Wairarapa was believed to be before the 2014 election, the Greens like to stand a candidate to maximise their party vote.
This agreement is a major step when you consider that the "left" has failed to be inspirational as completely separate parties, despite there being a decent amount of ammunition lying around to confront the National government with. They seem to find themselves at odds with a middle-class public that is generally enjoying the ride under a Tory regime and "Brand Key". Both Labour and the Greens have good ideas, and worthwhile causes and portfolios to pursue. But what can they offer the public, while at the same time building a dissatisfaction with what the government is doing now?
It's already been proven that scandals against John Key, or his ministers, don't count for much, especially a long way out from an election. People forget.
I could hope that a voting public would rise up en masse, declaring that enough is enough with regards to poverty and child abuse, but the only way this could happen is if a Moko-style event occurred at the right time. It's an irony that while the public like the Kiwi concept of fair play, it doesn't seem to apply to those most disenfranchised by society. The Labour-Greens are also up against that bubble of elderly, who may not be interested in poverty concepts.
It's a basic -- you've got to have policies that offer security, safety, shelter and jobs, and show why that's not happening with National. That bubble of elderly want to know their grandkids can get houses and jobs. Labour/Greens has to tell them how they'll do it.
