Winston for PM – Kiwiblog v The Standard

Tracey Watkins at Stuff: Arise Sir Winston, Prime Minister of New Zealand?

If you think that’s a stretch (and Peters has run with conspiracy theories on less), here’s another theory that’s been doing the rounds much longer.

It is that Peters will only retire after he has fulfilled his ambition of one day being prime minister. It’s even said to have been put on the able in NZ First’s protracted negotiations to form a government in 1996.

Election night 2017 might be now or never for Peters, given he will be 72 by the time the next election rolls around.

Which is why the Labour-Greens cooperation agreement announced this week might be the game changer everyone is talking about, but not in the way they think.

Because it may bring Peters’ dream within his grasp.

David Farrar quoted that and posited at Kiwiblog: Will Labour agree to make Peters PM?

Let’s say the election delivers a result of National 45%, Labour 23%, NZ First 15%, Greens 10%.

NZ First holds the balance of power. Peters demands to be made PM. National says no. A party on 45% is not going to give up the top job. Labour however has just 23%. They are desperate to be in Government.

Bang you have Winston as PM.

Anthony Robins has quoted the same from Stuff and countered Farrar: Will National agree to make Peters PM?

Let’s say the election delivers a result of National 41%, Labour 33%, Greens 15%, NZ First 11%.

NZ First holds the balance of power. Peters demands to be made PM. The Greens say no, so Labour couldn’t do it even if they wanted to (which they wouldn’t). But National are desperate to cling to power.

Key gets shipped out to Hawaii and bang you have Winston as PM.

The suggested results…

  • National 45%, Labour 23%, NZ First 15%, Greens 10%
  • National 41%, Labour 33%, Greens 15%, NZ First 11%

…are both quite feasible, but which is more likely given current polling?

National are likely to fall from their 47.04% from 2014 (they were 44.93% in 2008 and 47.31% in 2011).

Labour could be anywhere between 20% and 40% (interesting that Robins suggested 33%) but have dropped in every election this century from 41.26% (2002) to 41.10% (2005) to 33.99% (2008) to 27.28% (2011) to 25.13% in 2014.

Greens peaked at 11.06% in 2011 dropping slightly to 10.70% in 2014.

NZ First: 10.38% in 2002, 5.72% in 2005, 4.07% in 2008, 6.59% in 2011 and 8.66% in 2014.

Regardless of the actual numbers it looks likely National would require NZ First to form a government next year, and so would Labour along with the Greens.

So who’s suggested outcome is more likely, Farrar’s or Robins’?

Stable Government seems to benefit substantially from both a strong leader (Clark, Key) with a dependable same party co-leader (Cullen, English).

Anyone wanting a stable Government with medium term prospects should rule out Peters because Peters.

 

Leave a comment

35 Comments

  1. Kevin

     /  6th June 2016

    Commit political suicide just to gain power for three years? Not even Labour would be that dumb.

    Reply
    • Kevin – are you really sure? Getting their bums on the Treasury benches is all they care about and if that means Winston as PM for 12 months i reckon they will pull the trigger on an agreement in a heartbeat.

      Remember always: The Means justify the Ends

      Reply
    • PDB

       /  6th June 2016

      It’s not about being dumb Kevin, its about being desperate for power.

      I’d be all for a Labour/Greens/NZL first govt to prove to the left what a disaster that would be but being patriotic I’m not sure the country could come back after even 3 years of that.

      Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  6th June 2016

      Why Sir Winston ? That’ll be the day.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  6th June 2016

        It’s not completely out of the ballpark Kitty. If he goes into a coalition with any government.
        And as I understand it, it would be The Right Honourable Sir William Raymond Peters PC, CNZM

        Reply
  2. Alan Wilkinson

     /  6th June 2016

    Just make Winston GG with a full drinks cabinet and Marks deputy PM.

    Reply
  3. I am at a loss to understand why anyone would vote for winnie/nzf – populism only? He has achieved nothing, has no power, has no answers, makes much noise over very little and never provides evidence or proof of any of his allegations – is this really what nz needs?

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  6th June 2016

      well do we really need an ex forex gambler,who sucks up to Uncle Sam,tells lies on a daily basis,pulls ponytails and kowtows to corporations?

      Reply
      • do you have these all pre-typed Blaze so you can just cut and paste them in to you posts?

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  6th June 2016

          To be fair he mixes up the combinations and sometimes just uses one at a time.

          Reply
  4. unitedtribes2

     /  6th June 2016

    If I had to choose a PM out of the left wing bunch I would choose Peters against anything else on offer. Unless Nash starts a late run.

    Reply
  5. Corky

     /  6th June 2016

    So where’s the Maori Party in all of this? I assume their coalition agreement with National runs out on election night. If that is correct we can assume nothing about their loyalties.

    Reply
    • PDB

       /  6th June 2016

      Yes – but they have always been upfront about seeking the best deal for themselves after election night (no loyalties). National invited them to the table.

      Reply
    • Labour seem to think they can wipe out the Maori Party.

      Reply
      • Oops – snap – same comment at the same time Pete!

        Reply
        • Yes.

          It sounds like Labour strategists think that by joining forces with the Greens they can build their vote so they don’t have to deal with the Maori Party or Winston, and they have already burnt off Dunne.

          Bold? Arrogant? Deluded?

          Reply
          • All 3 Pete… but more frustrated, as Lefties often get when the hoi-poloi don’t understand the beauty and supremacy of their ideas.

            2020 should be their target and they should be campaigning for that now.

            The middle is not convinced by Labours tale of woe, and they need to turn to positive imagery and speech to gain traction.

            But that is hard to do when LAbour and the Greens are in a death match for leadership of the Left wing. The MOU is an attempted peace treaty but it will fail as no one does schism like Lefties.

            Reply
    • Labour thinks they can wipe them out and reclaim their feudal rights over the Maori seats, because they “belong” to Labour don’t you know.

      I suspect Flavell will hold his seat so at least 1 Maori Party MP will remain – and yes they will go where they can get the most loot in the time honoured raid and plunder tradition.

      Reply
      • They may even pick up votes and seats if Maori voters flee from Labour.

        Reply
        • Yes its possible. If Flavell is smart he will be hui-ing up a storm showcasing all that MP have achieved by being in the circles of power not standing wailing with Labour in the wilderness.

          Labour still think the seats are these by right – I think they are again misreading the sentiment

          Reply
  6. Winston will never ever ever be PM , I can’t think of any circumstances where a party with 30-40% of the vote would let the PM be the one with 8-10% of the vote , it would be the end of MMP …unless thats the idea …

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  6th June 2016

      I agree with sean – I cannot see any party except NZF seriously contemplating letting Winston be PM. These journos are just blowing wind out their ears.

      Reply
  7. Winston will be 72 when the next election is run. NZ First claim to have a succession plan in place. I am a tad older than Winston and gave up my job when I turned 70, not because I was tired or unable to do it successfully. After 50 years of Public Service, I thought that was enough, and it was time I let a younger person in to do the job I was doing. I really believe that Winston should do the same. With his very comprehensive Government Superannuation, his normal superannuation, and his share of the iwi’s Waitangi Tribunal payout he will be flush with the cash needed to keep him at a very high standard of living. Or is he obsessed by power?

    Reply
    • Ron mark will have change his image and behaviour substantially to appeal anything like Peters has done.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  6th June 2016

        Is there something missing in that comment PG? I don’t understand it. Ron Mark would have to change quite a lot from what he says. Some of the newer MPs need to be given more prominence & experience for NZF to look more like a more credible, responsible party post-Winston IMO. Winston’s age & potential for suddenly getting very ill &/or karking it after years of pretty hard living (so I hear) shouldn’t be discounted.

        Reply
  8. duperez

     /  6th June 2016

    Farrar runs the gamut of being mischievous, floating ideas, being serious, pretending to be serious, being piqued, being afraid, playing dirty, being authoritative, trying to sound authoritative, being a propagandist and being terminally partisan.

    Measure any stuff he writes, especially about Peters at the moment, against those.

    His stuff which maybe worth some consideration are his reviews of shows. Like his other ponderings and revelations they are but one man’s view but at least the motives may not be so complex.

    Reply
    • Are you aware of what is involved in writing thousands of blog posts over a decade, trying to be interesting and provocative, while at the same time being loyal to one party?

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  6th June 2016

        That’s a good point about the effort and intelligence to write thousands of blog posts – especially having first read and assimilated content from news items and articles, forming a view or a reasoned analysis and then publishing something worthwhile for commenting on PG. I couldn’t do it & I admire those who do.

        But wouldn’t it be slightly easier is you’re loyal to one party?

        Reply
        • “But wouldn’t it be slightly easier is you’re loyal to one party?”

          Why?

          I find it easier when not loyal to any party but with an open mind to the positives and negatives of all parties.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  6th June 2016

            Good point. I suppose it’s a bit harder when sometimes you’ve got to figure out and publish excuses when your party fave is stuffing up – like with housing.

            Reply
          • Yes Pete, and loyalty has to be earned, must never be assumed, and should flow down first before it goes up.

            Reply
      • duperez

         /  6th June 2016

        I am pleased that is neither my job nor mission in life. Getting up every day to try to make some one (or thing) look good or bad and choosing which elephants at the breakfast table to ignore are not my calling.
        Having said that I (and we) hold forth about all sorts of things the minutiae and mechanics we have only a passing acquaintance and knowledge of. Like the All Blacks and playing their game.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  6th June 2016

          So true. I’ve could’ve won all the games the All Blacks have lost for as long as I can remember.

          Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s