Westminster politics has traditionally been a contest between
the politicians and the people. Politicians want to rule; the
people want them to serve. New Zealanders want their politicians
to serve quietly; to serve without the appearance of conflict,
and, most of all, to promote the public interest over that of
organised business and organised labour.
Unfortunately, New Zealand inherited an absurd electoral system
which gave all the cards to the politicians. Commonly called "First
past the post" (FPP), it really was "The party which
is least unpopular on election day rules for three years".
In 1978 and 1981 it was "The party which is secondleast
unpopular on election day rules for three years ". Elections
were thoroughly negative affairs. We tried to chuck out one lot
of rulers. But some of us would insist on "wasting"
our votes by voting for a party or a person we actually wanted,
even when we knew they would not "win". So an unpopular
ruler would more often than not continue to rule.
After enough abuse - after far too much abuse - we, the people,
fought back. We voted for an electoral system that would for the
first time give us a House of Representatives. Three
years later we elected a Parliament that looked a bit like us.
We taught the rulers a lesson. But the rulers - and rulersinwaiting
- did not like the lesson. They would like us now to recant our
rejection of FPP. Many National Party Cabinet Ministers expect
to rule as of right. Why should they care if their party only
gets 700,000 votes in a country with 3,700,000 people?
We are confused at present. We hate our politicians more than
ever. Yet we also seem to hate the electoral system that is hated
by the politicians we hate. A TV3 poll on October 13 revealed
30% support for MMP, and 60% support for the old voting system.
Until yesterday, the rulers were clearly winning the propaganda
war. While opposing them, we nevertheless supported their antiMMP
agenda.
We want them to keep their feuds to themselves, and we fear that
MMP is a licence for them to expose their failings in front of
the television cameras. Ideally, we want them to agree. But we
don't yet appreciate that consensus emerges from robust argument.
We want high quality public goods and services. We want to pay taxes; the TV3 poll found that 62% did not want tax cuts. But
we do not want taxes being used to support the politicians and bureaucrats who
we are easily persuaded to see as self-serving.
The rise in support for FPP coincides with a rise in the support
for the Labour Party. Yet we cannot avoid the inference that the
people who have transferred their allegiance to both Labour and
FPP would rather we were being ruled by National (as we were ruled
in 199093, the days of Ruthenasia) than being governed by
a coalition. The 1996 election result represented a clear "win"
to National, in FPP terms. Perhaps we are still finding it hard
to shake the old habit of opposing what discomforts us instead
of actually supporting something?
The most influential constituency - the organised business community
that Labour supporters love to hate - are the most vehement opposers
of MMP. They know exactly why they hate coalition governments.
They know how much any coalition government limits their influence
over the rulers. They want "economic leadership", meaning
they want the rulers to rule, and not to serve. They see serving
governments as weak governments. And they want tax cuts; they
want to privatise large chunks of public revenue.
The privatisers like to tell us that we are in the midst of a
slump, and that only the rulers can lead us out of this slump.
They are half right. The national economy is not in recession,
but the public side of the national economy is. Education, housing,
health, social welfare: all are deep in crisis. The roots of the
crisis of course have nothing to do with MMP. They have much to
do with the past ability of New Zealand's rulers to rule unchecked.
We who support more public health would be pretty crass if we
return political power to those interests who want to commercialise
the public health system.
I felt disappointed after Monday's poll results. But yesterday
the people got one back on the politicians. One by one, the parties
in Parliament had to conceded to public opinion over the issue
of expanded Parliamentary accommodation. Under the old electoral
system, the rulers could do what they liked. Under an MMP Parliament,
the MPs have had to listen to their employers. Politicians exist
as one part of a social contract. That contract says, among other
things, that "you as our representatives cannot have what
you want for yourselves while you preach a diametrically opposite
message to the rest of us". We should be rejecting the hypocritic
oaths of FPP politics.
We could have done more. Instead of the people and the politicians
simply denying each other what each wanted - which is where the
political stalemate is at just now - we could have allowed each
other to have some of what each wanted (see "Can we Afford
to Shift the Beehive?"). But at least, for now, we
have seen a small victory for people power, in a year following
an election. That was unheard of in 1979, 1982, 1985,
1988, 1991 or even 1994. Who really voted for Ruth Richardson's
1994 Fiscal Responsibility Act?
We have a conservative government today because we elected a conservative
Parliament. That Parliament deserves to be able to represent us
for all of its allocated three years. Those who wanted a Labour
Government but didn't vote Labour cannot blame MMP. Democracy
is not about getting rid of governments simply because market
research polls show they are unpopular.
Among other things, democracy is about holding our legislators
to account, not by prematurely replacing them, but by getting
them to hear us. The "Parliamentary Palace" debacle
has shown us that we can now do that. More than accountability,
however, democracy is about service. The ultimate victory
of democracy takes place when our politicians know they
are in Parliament to serve, and not to rule. They serve
by overseeing an efficient welfare society.
 Back to: Rankin File Archive |
 Go to Keith Rankin's page |
( viewings since 28 Dec.'97: )