Rebel MPs put off their last stand

By RUTH BERRY political reporter

The Government avoided a showdown yesterday after rebel MPs deferred making a final stand on the foreshore.

But while it averted the crisis which threatened to overshadow today's unveiling of the final details of the controversial legislation, there are no signs yet that senior ministers have done anything more than delay it.

As the Government worked desperately to dampen threats of two potential byelections and discovered a third MP planned to abstain, it faced another major problem yesterday.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, whose party's support now appears necessary to pass the legislation, said he was "not happy" with the draft bill he had seen and wanted changes.

He was annoyed that the term "public domain" had survived, although ownership of the foreshore and seabed will be clearly vested in the Crown.

It has put him on a potential collision course with United Future, also planning to support the bill.

United Future leader Peter Dunne said yesterday that retaining public domain was a bottom line for the party.

However, following a "positive" late afternoon meeting with Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen, Mr Peters said that although one outstanding issue remained, he believed it would be resolved by today.

More serious for the Government are the intentions of Tai Hauauru MP Tariana Turia and Tainui MP Nanaia Mahuta, whose byelection threats challenge the stability of the Government.

Prime Minister Helen Clark said on Monday that the pair would be expected to announce their position on the legislation in the Labour caucus meeting yesterday.

She was then critical of Mrs Turia on several fronts, and made it clear her patience had worn thin and she wanted the matter settled.

The pair had a discussion late on Monday and Mrs Turia told the PM she would cross the floor and planned to force a byelection.

This was because Helen Clark had made it clear that losing her ministerial warrants was the price of opposing the legislation.

Helen Clark is understood to have expected this and suggested they begin talking practicalities.

Ms Mahuta was reported saying she would tell the caucus yesterday, giving its approval to table the legislation tomorrow, that she would oppose it.

The sides appeared deadlocked.

But the two MPs arrived at the meeting saying they did not want to vote on approving the legislation, still being drafted, before they had read the final version.

In Helen Clark's absence - she was chairing the Pacific Island Forum in Auckland - Dr Cullen took charge.

He could have directed the caucus to force the pair to vote, but instead took a softly, softly approach - in stark contrast to Helen Clark's the day before - saying they had a fair point.

The MPs and Wairarapa MP Georgina Beyer, who infuriated senior colleagues by revealing in her local paper yesterday that she planned to abstain, have now been given until April 27 to inform the caucus of their plans.

Dr Cullen signalled they may yet be given until early May when the first vote on the bill is held in Parliament.

Senior Beehive sources suggested Mrs Turia had "blinked", after the reality of losing her job, salary and perks hit home.

But it is clear the prospect of two byelections - following signals Ms Mahuta was also considering that option - together with the surprise news that a third vote had bled, sparked top-level panic in the Government.

Dr Cullen and other key players are understood to have engaged in a series of conciliatory phone calls with the two MPs before the meeting.

Mrs Turia made it clear beforehand that if forced she would have registered her formal opposition, saying "we've already voted against the policy", when outlined in the caucus last week.

Dr Cullen said "nothing has gone wrong", when asked why the caucus was taking such a different stance to that signalled by Helen Clark.

"People requested some more time to look at the details ... you have to respect colleagues who want to make up their minds on the actual facts rather than on the general matters they have seen so far."

He agreed MPs were familiar with the proposed policy but said drafting changes were still being made.

Rejecting suggestions that the refusal to force an ultimatum looked like the tail wagging the dog, he made it clear significant changes would not be made before it was introduced in an attempt to placate the MPs - making it difficult to see why they would change their minds.

But he stressed the party did not want the MPs leaving Labour.

Why the rebellion matters

By AUDREY YOUNG

Losing two MPs could threaten the stability of the minority Government.

It's all in the numbers: Labour and the Progressives govern in coalition with 54 votes. The Government's confidence and supply agreement with United Future gives it 62 of the 120 seats in the House, and the ability to govern.

If Tariana Turia and Nanaia Mahuta were to resign, the minority Government's numbers would be down to 60. It would still be able to govern because all the others put together would total just 58.

But if Labour lost the seats in byelections, it would need the support of either the Greens, New Zealand First, or the two new MPs to govern.

As for the foreshore bill, if the three Labour MPs (including Georgina Beyer) abstain, the Government could still pass the legislation - with United Future's eight votes. The vote could be 59 ayes, 58 noes and three abstentions.

If two abstained and one opposed it, it could still get through.

But if two opposed it and one abstained - the present position - the vote would be 60-60 and the Government would need the support of New Zealand First.

* For the official announcement of the Government's foreshore and seabed policy go to nzherald.co.nz/maori after 1pm.