Opinion: Graham Adams<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The path to election glory has traps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
NZ First\u2019s prospects at the election after a run of good polling are being talked up by increasingly enthusiastic commentators. But if a week is a long time in politics, more than six months is an eternity. And there are traps aplenty for the party to navigate before November 7.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Listening to the media, however, you might think the continuing rise of Winston Peters and NZ First is unstoppable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Podcaster and veteran newsman Duncan Garner has predicted NZ First could hit 20 per cent of the party vote while Danyl McLauchlan wrote in the Listener that if it can replicate the 13.6 per cent it won in the latest Taxpayers\u2019 Union-Curia poll, Peters \u201cwill be the de facto, if not actual, prime minister\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The 1News-Verian poll result released on Sunday night should have been a dampener, showing NZ First static at 10 per cent \u2014 and substantially lower than the Talbot Mills poll last week, which put the party on 15 per cent. Nevertheless, 1News\u2019 bulletin showed a clip of Peters saying: \u201cI told you we were going to turn your polls into confetti\u201d \u2014 as if his party had leaped again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Despite the media\u2019s bullishness, potential setbacks await. The most obvious is the perennial problem of whether Peters can be trusted not to disappoint his voters and go with Labour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
His supporters often doggedly resist acknowledging his long history of dashing voters\u2019 expectations \u2014 and argue \u201cThis time is different!\u201d \u2014 but the record is clear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 1996, he went with National after implying during the campaign he\u2019d support Labour and that voters should \u201cput Jim Bolger in opposition where he belongs\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 2005, after signalling he would not go into government with either National or Labour and would eschew the \u201cbaubles of office\u201d, he became Helen Clark\u2019s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister for Racing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 2017, he decided to make the progressive Jacinda Ardern Prime Minister despite Labour winning only 36.8 per cent of the party vote, and spurned the conservative Bill English, who won 44.4 per cent. Many of his former supporters have still not forgiven him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This election season he repeatedly said he wouldn\u2019t support Labour as long as it was led by Chris Hipkins. In other words, he had no reservations about supporting Labour; only its current leader presented a problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
More recently, Peters has occasionally declared he wouldn\u2019t go with Labour at all, but it is obvious from comments on social media a lot of people don\u2019t believe him. And little wonder. On Monday, he wouldn\u2019t give the NZ Herald\u2019s Ryan Bridge a direct answer when asked whether he\u2019d rule out a deal with Labour or even whether his \u201cstrong preference\u201d would be \u201cto stick with the current coalition\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is also becoming obvious that if NZ First lifts its vote to the mid-teens, a Labour-NZ First coalition might be viable without any help from the Greens or TPM \u2014 raising the prospect of Peters being able to bargain to become Prime Minister, for at least some of the next term. That opportunity might be irresistible to the 81-year-old as a last hurrah after 50 years in politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ironically, the higher NZ First rises in the polls, the more chatter there will be about Peters siding with Labour, which could scare away a significant chunk of his current supporters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
NZ First\u2019s electoral success will also partly turn on the public\u2019s view of how effective it has been in opposing Maorification and Treatyism during this term \u2014 and how much trust voters should place in its promises for the next term.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The party had a significant win in having the government clarify section 58 of the Marine and Coastal Area Act to make it more difficult for activist judges to grant customary marine title to iwi \u2014 as well as a crowd-pleaser with its bill to make English an official language (no matter how inconsequential that may turn out to be).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, the significance of Peters\u2019 coalition agreement to review Treaty clauses in legislation remains impossible to guess. It appears Cabinet has agreed to reduce Treaty obligations in selected laws to the lowest requirement \u2014 ie, to \u201ctake into account\u201d \u2014 but the details are still being withheld from the public.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Seymour damned the review with faint praise as a \u201cuseful exercise\u201d but said it \u201cdoes not remove the idea that there are Treaty principles\u201d. And major legislation \u2014 including Treaty settlement laws and the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 \u2014 lie outside its scope.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Peters, of course, had scoffed at Seymour\u2019s Treaty Principles Bill \u2014 which aimed to have Parliament define them rather than leaving it to judges \u2014 on the grounds that \u201cthere are no principles to the Treaty of Waitangi\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Alongside Luxon, he made sure the bill died at the second reading. But while Peters was contemptuous of it, M\u0101ori nationalists took it very seriously. It sparked a nationwide debate about the role of the Treaty in law and policy, and brought thousands of protesters on a hikoi to Wellington as well as a flood of submissions to the select committee. It became very evident then that Seymour is the politician M\u0101ori activists fear as their greatest threat, not Peters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He has also gone very quiet on a promise to amend the Waitangi Tribunal legislation to restore its original intent that was also part of NZ First\u2019s coalition agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
With National appearing to be reluctant to initiate opposition to co-governance and Maorification, the pre-election debate on the topic is largely between Act and NZ First. They are both fishing in the same pool for votes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the past week, Act has gained first-mover advantage by lodging a member\u2019s bill to ensure \u201cunelected members of council committees and subcommittees would no longer have voting rights, and would not count toward quorum\u201d. Many councils \u2014 including in the Far North, Auckland, Hastings, New Plymouth, Tasman, K\u0101piti Coast, Wellington and Invercargill \u2014 have appointed unelected representatives to council committees, governance structures, or formal co-governance arrangements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Act is making the running on this issue after Davina Smolders brought it to national attention. She is an Act-aligned councillor on the Far North District Council who initially objected to more iwi members sitting on committees than elected representatives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The stoush has already drawn comment from both NZ First and National and looks like it will help fulfil Seymour\u2019s promise to not let the momentum he built with his Treaty principles campaign die.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Unfortunately for NZ First, deputy leader Shane Jones criticised Smolders\u2019 stance opposing co-governance as \u201cperverse\u201d and \u201cpathetic\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He walked back his comments the next day after a deluge of criticism, describing it is an issue for locals to sort out rather than asking for government help as she had done. But he tacitly supported the push for iwi influence by implying she was a \u201cmischief maker\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Peters chipped in too, saying NZ First supported Cameron Luxton\u2019s member\u2019s bill, but didn\u2019t offer his support to Smolders either.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Local Government minister Simon Watts said he was \u201ca bit uncomfortable\u201d with the situation in the Far North and open to changing the law but showed no sign of realising how important the issue is to National\u2019s base. He told Heather du Plessis Allan on Newstalk ZB he thought he might be able to take a proposal to Cabinet within a month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As part of his 2026 campaign, Peters has promised a referendum on abolishing the M\u0101ori seats. However, he had also made the pledge a bottom line in 2017 but Labour had ruled it out even before he entered coalition talks with Ardern.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In fact, Peters putting Ardern into office has led to a damaging criticism of NZ First \u2014 that it isn\u2019t the socially conservative party he claims it is. As NZ Herald columnist Jonathan Ayling observed earlier this month, Peters \u201cmade Dame Jacinda Ardern the Prime Minister instead of Sir Bill English. You know, an actual social conservative.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ayling found his claim that the party is socially conservative \u201claughable\u201d, writing: \u201cLet\u2019s not forget Peters\u2019 role when abortion was liberalised and decriminalised, when euthanasia passed with the backing of NZ First MPs, and when the initial Covid response, including the lockdowns, was directed from the highest levels of government. Peters was not a spectator to any of this. He was the Deputy Prime Minister.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In a clarification, Ayling wrote on Facebook that while Peters ultimately voted against the liberalisation of the abortion laws in 2020, \u201chis role (along with other NZ First MPs) in supporting the legislation till third reading was critical to it passing.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The column \u2014 titled \u201cWinston Peters is no social conservative, nor is NZ First\u201d \u2014 clearly stung. Peters described Ayling as a \u201cmouth breather\u201d and his column as \u201cverbal diarrhoea\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He also implied Ayling was a \u201cpasty incel loser\u201d coming out of his \u201cmother\u2019s basement\u201d, who drinks \u201csoy lattes\u201d \u2014 as well as being a \u201cfour-flusher\u201d (apparently referring to a poker player who exaggerates his hand).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
They were extraordinary insults to level at someone like Ayling, who is a father of young children and runs a vineyard with his wife. He was also the very eloquent and energetic CEO of the Free Speech Union for more than four years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is true that Peters half-heartedly walked back his insults by qualifying his earlier statements with: \u201cAssuming Mr Ayling is neither a four-flushing moron nor a half-wit dunce\u2026\u201d while leaving open the possibility that he was indeed both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Peters obviously believed Ayling had misrepresented his position on conservative issues but the vitriolic nature of his denunciation was surprising, not least because the column sits behind the Herald paywall, which limits its reach. Why draw attention to it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Peters\u2019 intemperate response is perhaps best explained by the fact he\u2019s chasing the religious vote, especially among the Pasifika community. He wants to persuade his target audience that he understands not only their financial concerns but also their Christian beliefs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As political analyst Grant Duncan wrote on his Substack: \u201cThe recruitment of Alfred Ngaro [by NZ First] signifies that Pacific voters are a particular target. In 2005, Auckland\u2019s Pacific communities boosted turnout and gave Labour, under Helen Clark, a narrow win over National. They were voting with their economic interests, but against their Christian conservatism. NZ First is now combining social conservatism with concern for the economic struggles of blue-collar workers, aiming to draw that constituency away from Labour.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Consequently, Peters is sensitive to anyone challenging his claim to be socially conservative (or reminding voters that he was an integral part of Ardern\u2019s progressive government).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And Ayling is far from being a random observer. In fact, he could be described as a \u201creligious influencer\u201d, who is not only a social conservative himself but has an audience among various church congregations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He is steeped in the intricacies of both the euthanasia and abortion debates. As the Baptist website noted: \u201cJonathan [Ayling]\u2026 has postgraduate degrees in both politics and theology and spent much of his time in Parliament working as an advisor opposing legislation legalising euthanasia, cannabis, and abortion reform. He now travels widely, speaking at churches across several denominations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So when Ayling says Peters is not a true conservative on contentious issues such as abortion and euthanasia, his influence spreads beyond Herald readers to the Christian flock. That makes him much more dangerous to Peters\u2019 ambitions than he might at first appear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Peters\u2019 popularity has always rested in large part on his ability as an actor who can \u201cplay many parts, seeming to be all things to all people simultaneously\u201d, as Danyl McLauchlan put it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That approach can work brilliantly, but only until the contradictions become apparent. As a wag quipped on social media: \u201cThe best way to damage Winston Peters\u2019 electoral prospects is to introduce his supporters to each other.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Graham Adams is a freelance editor, journalist and columnist. He lives on Auckland\u2019s North Shore.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Opinion: Graham Adams The path to election glory has traps. NZ First\u2019s prospects at the election after a run of good polling are being talked up by increasingly enthusiastic commentators. But if a week is a long time in politics, more than six months is an eternity. And there are traps aplenty for the party<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":11390,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[45],"tags":[390,113,255,319],"coauthors":[921],"class_list":{"0":"post-12258","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-opinion","8":"tag-media","9":"tag-new-zealand","10":"tag-opinion","11":"tag-winston-peters"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Winston-Peters-state-of-nation.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12258","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12258"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12258\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12259,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12258\/revisions\/12259"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/11390"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12258"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnznews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcoauthors&post=12258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}