National's arrogant and contemptuous attitude

Last month, National Party leader Chris Luxon proudly declared that he would work with Winston to oust Labour. Today, his party is trying to threaten another election if he's forced to do what he said he would do:

The National Party has ramped up its efforts to try to stop NZ First holding the balance of power by raising the prospect of a second election, warning there was “a very real and growing possibility” National could not get a deal done, or of a hung parliament.

It comes as polls show it is increasingly likely National will need both NZ First and Act to form a government, despite National leader Christopher Luxon’s pleas to voters to deliver a clear two-party hand to him.

National’s campaign chair Chris Bishop said there was a scenario in which the left and right blocs got 60 seats all - “that chance is a real one and growing.”

“The second scenario is when there is essentially a hung Parliament and NZ First is in the middle, but it is just impossible to do a deal between National, Act and NZ First. That is a very real and growing possibility and that would necessitate, essentially, a second election.”

"Necessitate" is doing a lot of work there. Because it seems there's plenty of negotiation space on all sides for deals to form a government which don't require that at all. But National here is basicly demanding a do-over unless it gets exactly the sort of government it wants, as if the views of voters - and in particular, other voters, which they are forced to consider because MMP requires coalitions - didn't matter at all. It's as if they were saying "no coalitions; we'll go back to the polls unless you give us majority government".

This is an arrogant and contemptuous attitude, both to democracy and their potential coalition partners. And it conflicts fundamentally with the strong convention in Aotearoa that politicians must accept the election result and try and make it work, no matter how much they dislike it. That may mean a weak government which can't do anything (NZ First or ACT providing confidence and supply and nothing else, hamstringing each others' policy agenda). But if that's what we voted for, that's what we get. And if the politicians want something better, they need to make it work, and find some common ground. Jim Bolger could do that. Helen Clark could as well. So could Jacinda Ardern. Today, Chris Bishop is saying that National can't - or won't.

(And even if they apparently can, he's just signalled an intention to call a new election at the first excuse. I don't think Winston will take kindly to that threat. Demanding UK-style legislation to protect against such abuse unless a supermajority of parliament votes for an early election seems to be an obvious coalition demand).

If National's coalition of chaos negotiations fall apart, and Winston doesn't respond by offering confidence and supply to Labour as a "fuck you", and National gets its way and forces people back to the polls, I doubt people will be happy. Voters punish Prime Ministers who try and game the system by calling a snap election (Muldoon, Clark); I expect the punishment for those who try and game it even more by forcing a do-over because they don't like our choices to be even more severe.