The warhorse’s last stand?

The traditional maxim in New Zealand politics is never to write off Winston Peters. He has been down for the count before and rose from the canvas. Once, he was seen as a likely National successor as prime minister after Jim Bolger. But that all crashed and he founded New Zealand First. It soared and he was back in power as king maker. Down he went again, failing to win any parliamentary seats in 2008.

Somehow, Mr Peters scrapped back three years on. Then, in 2017 he was queen maker. He backed Labour and the Greens to exclude National, easily the largest party by seats won, from government.

This election, however, the valedictories are being written, as Mr Peters’ survival in Parliament will require a miracle.

New Zealand First endeavoured to promote itself as the voice of common sense and moderation in government. It was, indeed, the “handbrake” which prevented a capital gains tax, mandatory cameras on fishing boats, the strengthening of hate speech laws, light rail in Auckland and a Ihumatao settlement. The “three strikes” law was preserved thanks to its power. But the political landscape changed with Covid. Labour alone, or with the Greens, is now odds-on to win the election, leaving New Zealand First high and dry.

Instead, this so-called “common sense, could be viewed negatively. Apart from the $3billion Provincial Growth Fund, the party did not advance noteworthy policy.

Mr Peters has also found his go-to anti-immigration stance moot when borders are shut. And his warnings about the dangers of racial separation have failed to gain traction.

As commentators have noted, Mr Peters, who is 75, looks tired, New Zealand First’s policies hark to a bygone era, and David Seymour and Act have taken some of the disgruntled anti-establishment vote, including on the likes of gun-control legislation.

Meanwhile, Advance New Zealand has siphoned a small cohort of fringe and suspicious voters.

Mr Peters has done his best to win over racing supporters. Maybe that made a small difference. The largesse of the Growth Fund, however, is not transferring to votes. Even Northland is not responding sufficiently to the pork-barrel incitements.

Over the years the behaviour of wily Winston and his party have regularly prompted concerns, and the Serious Fraud Office charges last week against two men in relation to the New Zealand First Foundation further blot the party’s escutcheon.

Thanks to his wit, charm, cunning and skill, the enigmatic Mr Peters has extricated himself from many a tight corner. It is a marvel, for example, how he turned the focus of his superannuation overpayments into an attack on possible information leakers.

He has always been litigious and combative, as well as evasive when questioned. Long before Donald Trump, he played the anti-establishment underdog being unfairly smeared by the media. Nonetheless, Mr Peters as a foreign minister, and briefly as an acting prime minister, proved steady and capable. No-one should doubt his ability.

But Mr Peters’ populism in combination with his suave, beguiling appeal helped him get away with a lot. It also made him potentially more dangerous. He came from the old-school of former prime minister Robert Muldoon — a man Mr Peters admired — where winning votes trumped any semblance of coherent ideology.

Admire how Mr Peters, from the humblest of beginnings, rose to the top of politics. Respect his humour and his brilliant turn of phrase. Note his successful instigation of the Gold and SuperGold Card. But, assuming Mr Peters and his party sink under the 5% this election, let us not regret the departure of this long-time warhorse from the political front line.