“La constitution, c’est moi.”* So it seems, to hear the Prime Minister. Sticklers for form are sand in the gears.
Last week’s constitutional marvel has scandalised purists. But this country’s tradition is to adjust the constitution to political need. Helen Clark, Winston Peters and Peter Dunne are firmly in that tradition with their invention of sometimes-ministers who are mostly in the opposition.
Which should scare us more — the bird flu or what it might do to our standard of living? Much news space has been given to people getting sick. Time to think about how sick the economy could get, too. It could be nasty.
The Treasury is scoping the potential economic fallout from a bird flu strike. Involved are the Reserve Bank, the Ministries of Economic and Social Development, the Customs Service and the Inland Revenue.
Winston Peters has been back centre-stage, exactly where he likes to be. What if history had dealt him — and us — different cards?
What if in the last week of the 1999 election campaign Labour’s Tauranga candidate, Margaret Wilson, had suggested voters cast their electorate vote for the candidate who could beat Peters?
Much less left legislation, much more opportunity to influence bills and maybe a 30 per cent company tax rate: that is the outlook for business if a Labour-led government is formed.
Of course, if National overtakes Labour on the home stretch, the issue will be how much National’s right-leaning initiatives, and especially its tax policies, are modified. But as of yesterday, the odds seemed still to lie with Labour.
Here’s how Helen Clark and Labour might get a fourth term. Yes, a fourth term. That is, another term after this one.
Labour last got a third term in 1943. Since then Labour and the country have got used to Labour governments being cameo parts between long periods of National party rule.
So a third term is a huge prize for Labour. Surely, a fourth term is just fanciful.
Last week’s bagging of the Greens by business overlooks two facts: the Greens are not the government nor even a major influence on it and even Labour will not have a firm majority for its agenda.
Most discussion since the election has been on the makeup of the government’s support on crunch confidence-and-supply votes. But that says little about day-to-day support on policy and bills.
This is a tale of two conservatives, a jailbird and a radical — and a challenge for Don Brash’s white, male, provincialised National party.
First up is the late Bruce Jesson, who for decades, as a journalist and political activist, eloquently made the case for marxist socialism. A book of his writings is launched today.
Winston Peters has not had a good election. Had he known the date of the election well in advance, he might have had a better one.
In June, after a flurry of well-aimed attacks on the government in May, New Zealand First was averaging 10 per cent in opinion polls. Peters was promoting himself as an alternative national leader to Helen Clark and Don Brash and his party as well clear of the other minors.
When Don Brash and John Key have got over their loss, if that is what it turns out to be, they might thank their lucky stars. If they were strategising for their party’s long-term health, this may turn out to be the election to lose.
Brash and Key are both men in a hurry, Brash because of his age and Key because that is the way he tackles life.
The issue for the next government is unification. There is a lot of healing to do. This is a divided nation.
The provinces went a different way from the main cities in the election, piling up huge rises in National’s share of the vote and stripping a swag of electorates from Labour. The cities were much more sedate in their swing from the government — in many electorates Labour’s vote share went up.