Written By:
- Date published:
10:36 am, April 26th, 2026 - 46 comments
Categories: Christopher Luxon, election 2026, labour, nicola willis, nz first, Shane Jones, winston peters -
Tags:
THe past week has emphasised how National is in a rather large degree of turmoil.
Its polling is in the danger zone, under 30%.
This will mean that a significant number of current MPs will no longer have jobs after the next election.
Luxon tried to quell opposition to his leadership by calling for a vote of confidence which he won.
Sensing further weakness Winston Peters chose to describe the decision to have a vote as “a bad move”, “unprecedented” and suggested it would “have consequences”.
Nicola Willis chose to respond and showed why she will not be a future National leader.
She was interviewed by Morning Report and was asked how she could say that the Caucus vote in support of Christopher Luxon was emphatic. This is how the discussion went:
Hipkiss – how do you know it was emphatic, Nicola, if it was a secret ballot?
Willis – Because I was in the room, and the Caucus was extremely clear that what we want to do is focus on serving New Zealanders, that we have no time for anonymous mentions in the media leading to speculation. The Prime Minister himself called for a vote of confidence to affirm that support for his leadership. The result was very clear. It was by majority, and we have a very firm Caucus position which is once the Caucus takes a position, we all back it 100%. One for all, all for one.
Hipkiss – By majority, not unanimous?
Willis – Well, we don’t know the result of the vote. We never do. That’s not how we do things in the National Party. I was in the room, and I think there was extremely strong support for that motion.
Hipkiss – That was just the vibe rather than something you know for sure?
Willis – Yep. And I know a lot more about it than you do. You weren’t in the room.
So the vote was emphatic, it was also very clear, it was by majority and she does not know the result of the vote and never does and she thinks that there was extremely strong support because that was the vibe. Take your pick on what actually happened.
Willis also chose to attack NZ First for Winston’s comments about National’s leadership vote and said this:
And what [Peters is] doing, and it’s very transparent, is he’s saying vote for New Zealand First. Now, that’s his job. My job is to say vote for National, and I am pointing out that the risk with a vote for New Zealand First is it’s a risk to prop up a Labour-led government that brings us back to economic instability, more taxes, more borrowing, a weaker economy.
It is as if the last two and a half years has not happened.
Then Willis made this extraordinary statement when Labour’s Tangi Utikere was asked about the Indian Free Trade deal.
You’re choosing to get into bed with them Tangi. You’re choosing to get into bed with the party that referred to Indian New Zealanders or Indians choosing to come to New Zealand as a butter chicken tsunami.
Hipkins then came out with this perfect response:
… you’re calling out Labour for getting into bed with a party that you’re already in bed with. Is that right?
And just to note Labour has described Jones’ comment as blatant racism. To date National has not done this.
Statesperson cautious Willis has disappeared and the tone she is currently showing suggests a level of nervousness which is appropriate, given that on current polling she may not make it back to Parliament.
Paters has responded to the suggestion NZ First will go into coalition with Labour in clear terms:
The incoherence of his tweet suggests he is still drinking strongly the Trump Kool Ade.
And to add to the sense of drama last week Shane Jones chose to attack Willis for losing too much weight.
My impression is that this is essentially performative art. National and NZ First are closer than ever. They both want to be in power after the next election.
This fight appears to me to be a carefully calibrated attempt to keep voters within the right wing block, even though many of them despair about how bad this Government is. It also sucks up media bandwidth and stops people from talking about issues such as climate change, rampant poverty and the pending fuel crisis.
But it may be working too well and National is becoming unstable as its support shrinks.
Parts of Labour think that a deal can be done with Winston. I think they should rethink this.
National constantly saying that NZ First will back up the left will hopefully stop it haemorraging votes of disgruntled National supporters to NZ First. And it may cause some soft Labour votes heading NZ First’s way. This will increase the prospect of National being returned. The only way Labour can counter this is to show that a vote for NZ First will mean a vote for the continuation of a National led Government.
Labour and Hipkins should address this by ruling out going into coalition with NZ First. Tell the country that there is no place in a cabinet for Shane Jones and that Peters’ ego driven quest to become Prime Minister should be resisted.
The MMP dynamics are fascinating and incremental changes in support will make many people reassess their vote. Labour needs to present as valid alternative to the current Government. Which is and will be supported by Winston Peters.
You’re right MS. We need to hammer home that a vote for NZ1 is a vote for this current coalition.
Also despite Winnie’s protestations he has been in government for generations.
Yes. Block Peters. Consign him to National. Make him own their shared failings. Tie him to all of their decisions. Talk ferries whenever possible. Tie Peters to Jones. Tie the 3 coalition parties tightly together, don't let them try to differentiate.
Reading that exchange, it is farce isn't it. I wonder how a person as frivolous as Willis got into our Minister of Finance position? How did Hitler get to be the money controller in Germany? There is something wrong with pathways to power in our system. Keep the questions coming Hipkins. When you get in with the thoughtful coalition – do some good patchwork and have regular discussions with right-wing types querying, on tv and newspapers. We need to prick the hot-air balloons of right wing confabulations as they start being inflated. I am sure Clark's work is important and Labour needs to think, listen, act or they will get the same treatment as the homeless beggars on the street got before they were made illegal as unwanted bodies.
Agree totally Micky. Hipkins should rule out going with NZF right now. The Left should have no links with anti-woke** butter chicken racists.
As you say, the Left will then be able to emphasize throughout the campaign that "a vote for NZF is a vote for National".
**Where woke is defined as “A state of awareness regarding social injustice, systemic racism, and inequality.”
Performance Art is designed to work like distraction.
Winston Peters has one of his awful coalition requests being enacted by Goldsmith!!
Goldsmith is removing mentions and clauses relating to Te Tiriti O Waitangi.
So distancing himself from that piece of work hides the origins of it in Winston's coalition documents.
We do not want this colonial narrowness, his nasty narrow gender views, or his ego attached to the next Government.
He is doing harm as a third leg, imagine him as the seat of power No thank you.
Check your enrolment and vote wisely on Nov 7.
On current polling, the CoC cannot avoid being a one-term govt without NZ First aid.
So, CEO Lux & Co. (~30%+8%) must keep on Winston's good side, assuming he has one.
Labour/Green/TPM (~36% + 10% + 2%) is the only combo that has a realistic chance of consigning 'mouth in a suit' Winston First to the NZ history books once and for all.
How about Labour/Green/TOP?
Or National/ACT/TOP?
I think TPM is likely to retain at least one of their six electorate seats – TOP has none, and is currently averaging around 3% of the party vote, roughly in line with their 2.2% result in 2023. TOP is a centrist party, more sensible but less (currently much less) popular than Winston First. They may claw their way into parliament when Winston finally gives up the ghost, but not before, imho.
Still, TOP could always pull a ‘Peter Dunne worm’ out of the hat – never say never.
Yes, and that ended well, didn't it? Got ourselves landed with a bow-tie-wearing weather-vane just as given to switching allegiance as the Mahogany Gargoyle.
Let’s not open a can of worms from Dune.
It wouldn't be difficult to ask Chat GTP to create a "Peter Dunne worm", would it?
"Friends, kiwis, countrymen, lend me your ears…………."
Labour won in 2020 in FPP style in a MMP system…..and Jacinda was at the helm and the mic……Winston was shown the door……times have changed, the reality in 2026 is Winston is back in the room and on a bigger couch…….however the opposition has so much ammunition that can be fired at this current failed regime, when, where and how to aim could become the issue………Chippy has to step up and step up big time…….the first step would be for him to stand a little taller, speak a little slower with more gravitas in his voice……that alone would be music to the ears compared to the meaningless horse race corporate commentary from Luxon and the raspy petulant screech from Willis…….
It’s easy to understand why Winston Peters will go into coalition again with National and ACT if given the chance. He’s been running rings around Luxon, which started at the coalition ‘negotiations’ (if we can call them this) in 2023 and continued ever since. Based on current performance (abysmal), I can only shiver at the thought of ex-CEO Luxon having coalition talks with Peters. David Seymour is no different but has no real alternatives available, so he’s playing a different card (with a lot of help from its usual helpers such as The Taxpayers’ Union, its twin The Free Speech Union, its wise mentor The New Zealand Initiative, and many other
shillshelpers). It’s a threesome made in hell.Yes, a helluva threesome but what's in it for Winston? Another round of hobnobbing and the parliamentary pay-packet? Surely he's suffering from existential angst already! He must want the Top Job, especially given the milk-sop pretender occupying the space presently – how many more rounds does ol' laughing-chops reckons are in him?
I think Peters does because he can. He loves (the) attention, being relevant & important (and who doesn’t?). He loves patronising put-downs and being the wisest & most experienced of them all. If I’m correct, it’ll be 50 years coming up in 2029 since he entered Parliament, so one more term and he’ll be able to chalk one up for the history books.
This looks less like a genuine rupture and more like standard pre-election distancing. The ritual throat-clearing before coalition partners start pretending they were never really responsible for each other.
We shouldn’t overread it or start practising Kremlinology.
The Left also shouldn’t waste time trying to prove NZ First is hypocritical. Voters who dislike Winston already believe that. Voters who like him don’t care.
The stronger line is simpler: make NZ First own the Government’s record.
They weren’t outside observers or reluctant passengers. They supplied the votes, took the offices, signed the coalition agreement, and stayed while the decisions were made.
So when they try to wriggle free, the question should be direct and repeated:
If your principles were being violated, why didn’t you walk away?
And if you weren’t prepared to walk away, why should anyone believe you were ever meaningfully opposed?
Yup, what Mercurio said @ 2 too.
As to the worm wriggling free and off the hook, they’ll counter that with the agree-to-disagree provisions they invoked, which weren’t deal-breakers. Don’t teach Winston how to suck an egg.
When we reactively say, "…but Winston agreed to this/voted for that…" we get no cut-through because…reactive.
If we draw the line and say, no, we won't invite NZFirst into coalition with us, we can proactively broadcast, at our discretion and in our own time, the facts of the matter regarding what Peters et al supported and brought into being.
National will then be glued to them. Peters will harm both of them with his outbursts. Labour could pre-emptively advertise Peters involvement at the time of Covid, highlighting and headlining what he and his party gave their votes to during that period.
We have been, are being too defensive and not overt enough with our declarations, in my opinion.
+100 Merc
MMP doesn't respect principles.
2017 election night was a nightmare. 2020 was a miracle. 2023 was miserable.
None of them had detectable principles involved.
"MMP doesn't respect principles."
I don't understand what you mean, Ad. Principles no longer apply under MMP? When we share power, we have to regard our principles as negotiable?
Didn't the 2020 election win occur on the back of the principle that governance can be based upon kindness and compassion?
I thought it did.
Emphatically not. MMP requires coalition agreements which are negotiated. 2020 is the only election in which one party won 50% of the vote and it won't happen again.
So what you are saying Ad is that you would support a Labour government in coalition with the current overtly racist, anti-woke, anti-environment, anti-vax, anti-Maori, Trumpian version of NZF?
This is NOT the NZF of 2017…it is a different, much more rabid, animal.
Hipkins should grow some cojones and rule them out.
The electoral system is rigged against principles that Mercurio espouses.
If everyone ruled everyone else out, MMP government breaks down.
Obviously Peters is establishing his price at 15%.
If Labour get to 40% on election day, it would need the Greens to lock in 11% to lock out NZF.
If neither get to that vote %, we get a 2017 scenario in which Peters gets to choose. And right now he chooses National.
They deserve each other.
We underestimate the electorate-they can differentiate between people that have principles and people that don’t.
Your numbers are wrong. Lab 36 Gre 11 TPM 2.5 would see a Left leaning government, assuming TPM wins a constituency seat, which they will.
I'm discounting TPM as I don't believe they will get anything. They are cooked.
I would like to overestimate the electorate, with more good people geting Greens to 15% so we wouldn't have to have this discussion at all.
Unfortunately Greens aren't attracting votes outside of their usual. And NZF are.
Unless the Green Party actually starts trending up pretty soon, there won't be a change of government.
If most of the TPM party votes in the last election switched to Labour, and the ~300,000 Kiwis on the Māori roll elected TPM candidates, then that could counterACT the CoC's electoral 'reform' and serve the Left quite well, imho.
https://thestandard.nz/this-trick-of-national-could-win-them-the-2026-election/
Agree totally Drowsy…..tactical voting.
If anyone should want to get rid of this government it is Maori.
You discount TPM at your peril 🙂
" Parts of Labour think that a deal can be done with Winston "
Who or what parts are you referring to ?
The silence is deafening. Obviously a sensitive subject ?
Stool issues tend to be sensitive if not painful.
In 2017 we were laughing at National for having no mates and cannibalising their potential partners.
It now looks like they want to go down that road again.
Nonsensical comment.
National is the one being cannibalised yet the scavengers, aka ‘mates’ or ‘partners’, won’t leave the twitching corpse and would like to continue feasting on it for another term. Like parasites, if one of them dies, they all die.
How is that non-sensical?
It is quite clear that they are in full on attack mode against their partners (i.e trying to cannibalise them again)
I can’t see it myself – I had a look at National’s press releases.
You must be privy to inside info.
Only Privy to Willis lashing out at Peters. A marriage made in heaven
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/foreign-minister-winston-peters-denies-he-made-a-mistake-releasing-emails-showing-pm-wanted-explicit-iran-war-backing/Q6JUDTOUXREGLDFQYUP7ANISJI/
Sigh
That link is dated 30 Apr, 2026 02:58 PM; your original comment @ 11 was dated 28 April 2026 at 11:12 am. You couldn’t have been privy to something that hadn’t happened yet.
Willis may not be cannibalising NZFirst, but today she did tear strips off Jones.
Maybe she'll roast him later.
Come election day Labour and the Greens may need a third coalition partner.
Winston is supposed to be the moderate centre line that pulls left to the right and right to the left.So, despite what he says, he will go with either. It’s suicide for him to permanently align with one or the other because he would be irrelevant.
So, despite the rhetoric, post election Labour/Green may be forced to choose between TPM in its current form and NZ1.
Not an easy choice, which is why all parties, last and right are trying to maximize their own share of the vote. Labour and Green particularly, to try to avoid having a 3 way coalition.
But they will have a 3 way coalition if that's what it takes.
So, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Right now, the focus is on building a stable platform of Labour/Green, so the the third party isn't needed or has marginal clout.
Hipkins would be quite foolish to say that there is no way that he would go into a coalition with NZ1. If, after the election the only way that he could form a Government is to include NZ1 he should, and I think will, make the offer and try and do a deal.
He would be quite mad to refuse to do so if that is what is needed. If he can make an acceptable deal he should, if the alternative is to not be able to form a Government.
On the other hand I think he would be quite mad to do a deal in TPM. I don't believe that he could form any sort of stable Government with them in the mix, or give into any of their wild ideas which are unlikely to be acceptable to most non-Maori.
"post election Labour/Green may be forced to choose between TPM in its current form and NZ1"
In my opinion that would be a very easy choice to make.
The only way Labour / TMP arrangement would fail is if Labour did something dumb.
Like most right whingers, you're making the assumption Chippy would be as weak and as unable to manage coalition partners as Luxflakes. TPM would be very much a minority party within a 3 way coalition, very much as ACT is now, but with much less influence.
Chippy, after all, has not been a CEO – he knows how to manage people!
An easy choice between the toxic/racist/conspiracy laden "Trumpian ideas" of NZF and the sometimes extreme but overall beneficial ideas of TPM!
If the choice was between TPM and NZF, Hipkins would choose TPM and successfully manage the resulting coalition with the enthusiastic and reliable support of TPM who, in full appreciation of being invited to join and bearing in mind the filthy way they were treated by the CoC, would make ideal partners. Te Ao Māori would be hugely grateful for the turn of events.
Peters and his scabby crew must be ejected from the political arena asap.
Supposed to be, but NZF went into coalition with ACT.
He has never been in a government for more than one term. He sees the re-election of the coalition as his last chance.
NZF has signalled that it would not back a Labour-Green coalition, nor be part of coalition with the Green Party.
Coalition talks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_New_Zealand_general_election
Willis attacks Shane Jones. That would be fine if it was sincere but we all know she's a fraud. The age-old political tactic: accuse your opponents of your own sins, and rely on the cop-out "balance" in the media to muddy the waters.
These are the facts (and very easy to check):
Hipkins specifically used the word "racist" to criticise Shane Jones.
Luxon, when asked to do the same, specifically refused.
So Willis goes full-on dishonest distraction to cover for him.
‘Shame on you Shane Jones’: Nicola Willis unleashes on NZ First over India deal | Stuff