The Standard

Metiria Turei was right but did we learn the lesson?

Written By: - Date published: 11:38 am, September 1st, 2025 - 44 comments
Categories: labour, Metiria Turei, poverty - Tags:

At the start of the election campaign in 2017, Metiria Turei gave a speech about the difficulties of life on a benefit in New Zealand. She talked about her early adult life as a young mum and the things she needed to do to survive on a benefit. Half of New Zealand freaked out, the rest of us just nodded and went yep, about time we talked about it. 

Turei paid a big price for that speech, losing her political career. The Green Party nearly lost their position in parliament at the election. But she and they were right.

In the following year there was a marked increase in mainstream media coverage of the realities of life on a benefit. As with other major issues like climate, the Greens had shifted the Overton Window on a compassionate response to poverty, and this has largely remained, slowing the ability of National to directly entrench poverty.

But fast forward to 2025 and this is where we are. From RNZ last week,

Elderly renters, women struggling with the cost of living

A researcher says retirees who are renting or are women are being hit hard by the cost of living as the price of rate, insurance and power can vary month-to-month.

…

Ngaire Kerse, an Auckland University research and chairperson of Ageing Well, said it was well known older people who were renting were really struggling at the moment.She told Morning Report, older women and older renters were the retirees hit hardest by rising costs.

“Older women are well-known to have less accumulated wealth through their lives and more often live alone.

“People who rent [also struggle]. Elderly people who are Kainga Ora clients are better off [than renters], as they have a fixed price for rent.”

This is depressingly predictable. If you don’t address the underlying drivers of poverty, then more and more people get poor.

This post isn’t an invitation to bash Labour. The days of ‘Labour are just as bad as National’ being in any way valid are gone. National are patently rending wholesale destruction on New Zealand.

It’s vital that the left gets to form the next government. See Res Publica’s post on the importance of messaging discipline on the left in doing that. Beyond that, we have to build a compelling narrative that swings New Zealand back towards egalitarianism.

But this isn’t 2017. If the cost of living crisis is the top priority for most voters, the challenge now is how to address voter concerns while upholding values around care for all of society. We are in a knife edge of what kind of society we want to be.

In the next election campaign, Labour will be wrestling with centre left real politik, the effects of Dirty Politics, and presenting a post-Ardern vision. The broader left have more leeway to tell a better story, but it can’t be at the expense of Labour getting for form government. So what is the story we want to tell that not only creates the kind of country we want, but is appealing to most people?

44 comments on “Metiria Turei was right but did we learn the lesson? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Kay 1
    1 September 2025 at 1:32 pm

    Unfortunately, most of the current poverty stories in the media focus on pensioners. Perhaps the thought of granny shivering and starving in her drafty private rental that costs nearly all her pension will tug at the heartstrings more than the plight of the disabled, sole parents or unemployed? Or that everyone knows that they're likely to reach 65 and that might even be a reality for them?

    Face it, NZ has an awful track record of giving a damn about us, and have never shown any interest in the realities, although it was quite amusing hearing about the shock to the system when people who lost their jobs during covid found themselves on the receiving end ' I had no idea it was that bad!' So very briefly, reality of the dole came back into focus, but those same people were rewarded with a higher rate- a glaringly obvious recognition by the government that the dole isn't enough to live on.

    If Turei had confessed to hiring an accountant to find all the loopholes so she could legally pay less tax, most of the country would've applauded her and the Greens would've got a boost at the election. It's patriotic to cheat the taxman, but a crime to do what you can to pay the bills when you're on a benefit. That's how twisted it is.

    Labour has made their position on poverty very,very clear over recent decades by their deliberate inaction, or ‘glacial’ steps, so they can say they’re doing something. They’ve had more than enough opportunities but have deliberately chosen to retain the status quo. Our only hope is a coalition with greens who have more seats for leverage.

    • weka 1.1
      1 September 2025 at 2:08 pm

      we've moved on from child poverty to pensioner poverty 😉

      L/G/TPM would be ideal with an increase in the latter two. But for a centre left government, Labour still have to contend with NZF and what the swing vote will do if the polling looks like that.

      • Kay 1.1.1
        1 September 2025 at 3:30 pm

        Do you think disabled poverty is never mentioned by anyone- pollies, media- because deep down, they're scared something could happen to them, so if they pretend it doesn't exist, then they don't have to think the unthinkable?

        • weka 1.1.1.1
          1 September 2025 at 3:42 pm

          I do think there is a strong vein of that in NZ, and can't see why MPs and MSM would be somehow immune to it. That and just a rejection of people that aren't hard men so to speak. It's why we don't deal with long covid very well as a country. I've heard people with physical disabilities that mean they use a wheelchair say they have people say to them they'd rather be dead than in a wheelchair and this must colour how that non-disabled person tries not to think about life for disabled people.

          Things did change after Turei's speech. Not to solve everything, but it freed up the conversation and suddenly the MSM were writing sympathetic articles.

          • Kay 1.1.1.1.1
            1 September 2025 at 3:48 pm

            It's been making me furious for years now. When the regular as clockwork bashing come around, the conversation is all about the unemployed (bludgers) and solo mums -never solo dads- (feckless and irresponsible), but never sickness or disability.

            It's like we don't officially exist.

  2. Kay 2
    1 September 2025 at 1:32 pm

    @Weka- typo in the title

  3. Visubversa 3
    1 September 2025 at 1:56 pm

    If Metiria had stood at that meeting and gave almost the same speech with the paternal grandmother of her child standing by her side agreeing that the punitive claw backs to the DPB meant that any financial assistance that her family gave Metiria would be discounted from her benefit and that this needed to change, Metiria would probably be still a leading political figure.

    But she didn't. Every Reporter in the country knew that Ann Hartley (former Labour MP and Mayor of North Shore City) was the paternal grandmother of that child, and that the Hartley family were neither poor nor irresponsible. They would have given their last dollar to support their first grandchild. They even bought a house in Kingsland for Metiria and Paul to live in

    Metiria chose another option which was fine. Unfortunately, it did not stop her from using the address of that house to enroll to vote in a subsequent Election so she could vote for a friend standing for the Monster Raving Loony Party – which lead to the subsequent Electoral Fraud investigation. But that is another story.

    Metiria completely blindsided the Hartleys. The media descended on them like a flock of vultures, even chartering a helicopter to land on the beach in front of the holiday home on Great Barrier where the family had retreated to. Finally someone told the whole story to John Campbell and Metiria resigned.

    It was dreadfully bad political management. The message of the punitive clawbacks was completely lost. Metiria's political career was over.

    Any Party that would let it's Co-leader commit that sort of political suicide just before an Election deserves to have the story told to every subsequent Stage 1 Politics class for the rest of time.

    • weka 3.1
      1 September 2025 at 2:10 pm

      we all have our views on the political naivety of the Greens at the time, but that's not what the post is about. I cut a whole section out of the post to avoid being derailed into that.

      • Sanctuary 3.1.1
        1 September 2025 at 2:15 pm

        The bold assertion is Turei moved the Overton window, and all posters are saying is that is ill-judged assertion given Turei's material circumstances at the time and the empirical outcome for the Greens in the election.

        • weka 3.1.1.1
          1 September 2025 at 2:26 pm

          I understand the argument, but my own was that despite the political naivety of Turei and the Greens, they still succeeded in shifting public opinion.

          Metiria Turei explains this week why she has no regrets about her admission of benefit fraud from 25 years ago,

          It means that no-one in this country claim ignorance of what poverty looks like. Or can claim ignorance about how the system drives people into such despair.

          A whole lot of shit went down after her admission, but in the past few months I’ve seen more real stories of people’s struggle with poverty and welfare being told in the MSM and on social media than I’ve ever seen before. The importance of this cannot be overestimated, because the kinds of stories being told about welfare determine what we do.

          https://thestandard.org.nz/metiria-tureis-legacy/

          If you want to make an argument that public opinion wasn't shifted, please do.

    • Sanctuary 3.2
      1 September 2025 at 2:12 pm

      Thanks for that, I read the OP and wondered if the author knew that the Overton window isn't the oval orifice out of which Turei shat her political career before resigning and disappearing to teach various nebulous topics in the retirement home for failed left wing politicians that is Dunedin.

      It is hard to argue that a speech that helped cost the Greens six of their fourteen seats somehow moved the debate on the topic to the left! I recall no such increase in public sympathy towards those on a benefit as result of Turei's actions. More likely the election of Ardern and the whole kindness thing had a much bigger effect on civic discourse.

      • weka 3.2.1
        1 September 2025 at 2:26 pm

        selective memories I think, but maybe put your comments in the context of the whole post.

      • Ad 3.2.2
        1 September 2025 at 2:54 pm

        Dunedin is wonderful.

        The last place in New Zealand with an active civic culture. And has the institutions to support it.

    • bwaghorn 3.3
      2 September 2025 at 6:57 am

      So she had access to financial help but chose benifit fraud instead?

  4. SPC 4
    1 September 2025 at 2:19 pm

    One thing to do is to note the range of those that are in hardship.

    1.Disability (still on less than super rate support)

    2.Sickness (not yet covered by ACC).

    3.Unemployment

    3A(ageing singles unemployed)(temporary housing based on income related rent).

    3B(couples without children reduced to one income)(JSB payment to the non working partner).

    3C(those over 65 no longer able to work to pay the rent)(housing based on income related rent).

    4.Sole parents.

    5.Requiring those on benefits to pay debts (student debt is only paid when in employment).

    6.those losing access to the food banks they are dependent on, unable to afford dental care, lack access to primary health care, homelessness.

    • weka 4.1
      1 September 2025 at 2:29 pm

      it's tricky, because yes, that list is important, but will it help the left win the next election? I don't know if it will make swing voters compassionate or more likely to look after their own. For those of us already disposed to the collective wellbeing, it's hard to understand the people that look at how terrible things for other people are and decide to vote as if that can't happen to them.

      • SPC 4.1.1
        1 September 2025 at 2:35 pm

        It is required as a values statement, after all we are a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

        It does mention provision of housing, health care and adequate income (here onto the Fair Pay Agreement, Industry Awards and pay equity).

        And in the, will it do them good category, Labour (and Greens and TPM) should give those in hardship a reason to vote (and enroll to vote).

        • weka 4.1.1.1
          1 September 2025 at 2:58 pm

          Ok, I follow now. I think it needs to be written in a positive HR frame:

          eg

          1.Disability (still on less than super rate support) –>

          1. All New Zealanders with disabilities have the right to live above the poverty line and take part fully in society. Raise SLP and SB to the rate of Superannuation.

          • Descendant Of Smith 4.1.1.1.1
            1 September 2025 at 4:11 pm

            Keep in mind those with disabilities who do not get any assistance as their partner earns above the cutout point for any support yet pays somewhere around $6,000 to $9,000 more in tax than a couple earning the same amount.

            There's also a large group of predominantly female sexual abuse survivors who should be getting ACC as they were working at the time of the abuse but just can't go through the difficulty of getting ACC – you have to do it once for counselling support then again for ERC – even if they have granted the counselling. Their earnings are severely reduced when they should not be. ACC knows this as they know which clients received counselling but not ERC but do nothing about it.

            • weka 4.1.1.1.1.1
              1 September 2025 at 4:22 pm

              so many things that need fixing 🙁

              The GP policy of transforming ACC into the Agency for Comprehensive Care would change a lot of that.

              What is ERC?

              • Descendant Of Smith …
                1 September 2025 at 6:50 pm

                Earnings related compensation. (probably got a new name now – just says weekly compensation on their website)

        • Kay 4.1.1.2
          1 September 2025 at 3:42 pm

          And in the, will it do them good category, Labour (and Greens and TPM) should give those in hardship a reason to vote (and enroll to vote)

          And that's the biggie. It's pretty well established that a large chunk of the non-voters are left-leaning, and hypothetical compulsory voting would seriously change the makeup of parliament.

          As of June this year, there are 406,128 people receiving a main benefit (https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/statistics/benefit/2025/jun/jun-25-bfs-snapshot-a4.pdf ) which is an awful lot of votes were they all used.

          But years of being beaten into submission and into survival mode leaves many not even registering elections, yet alone voting. I've come very close myself, so understand why this happens.

          How can we turn this around?

  5. Belladonna 5
    1 September 2025 at 2:44 pm

    I don't think that the Overton window of benny bashing in NZ has changed one little bit in the wake of Turei's spectacular political self-destruction.

    The GP was heavily punished in the 2017 election on the back of it.

    The only bright light for the left was that the brief surge in GP popularity (following the initial speech, before the journalistic investigation began) appears to have been the catalyst for Little resigning and Ardern taking the Labour leadership – gaining enough votes to make negotiations with NZF a reality – and eventually resulting in a centre-left government.

    Ardern's focus was on child poverty – and this resulted in some benefit conditions (for those with children) improving; but there was little political appetite for a wholesale revision of benefits during 2017-2023. The WEAG report pretty much sank without a political ripple. Which indicates, not that Labour didn't care, but that they felt implementing it was a losing strategy – since it didn't have widespread public support.

    Under National – it seems as though claw-backs are underway – e.g. the announced change over income from boarders being included in your total income. With little, if any, public outcry.

    https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/about-work-and-income/news/2025/board-payments.html

    I would suggest that thinking that Turei has shifted the Overton window in any meaningful way, is pretty optimistic.

  6. Res Publica 6
    1 September 2025 at 3:45 pm

    I don’t know if Metiria shifted the Overton Window as much as people say, but what she did do was force the public, the media, and the government to confront the realities of poverty in Aotearoa.

    Bene-bashing is easy if you’ve never sat across from someone choosing between paying rent or buying feeding their kids. It’s the same way racism seems “simple” if you’ve never stood on a marae or grown up in Flaxmere as the only Pakeha family on your street.

    Once you know people’s stories, the stereotypes stop working.

    That’s why the most important thing we can do when we talk about poverty is humanise it. These aren’t “losers” or people who made “bad” choices. They’re our friends and neighbours. Our aunties and uncles. The kids our kids go to school with. The old guy trimming his hedge down the street.

    Because, when it comes down to it, all politics is personal. That was the power of Metiria’s speech: it made the abstract visceral. It’s also why the Greens’ most successful campaign wasn’t 2017 but “Vote for Me” back in 2008: it told real human stories, and it worked.

    Fast-forward to 2025, and the cost-of-living crisis is brutal. But that’s exactly why the left needs a narrative rooted in empathy. Not just policy, but a story that connects. One that reminds voters that when we take care of each other, we all do better. That’s not weakness; it’s strength.

    It’s how you build trust, shift hearts, and win elections.

    Because here’s the thing: this is who we are. We are still the same people who believed in building a better version of the worlds we left behind. Still the same people who voted for Savage. For Kirk. For a fair go. for dignity, for everyone.

    It’s in our DNA as a country. We just need to tap into it. And tell that story in a way that cuts through the spin and the bullshit.

    Build a message around that, and we have something powerful. Something that can win.

    • Kay 6.1
      1 September 2025 at 3:57 pm

      And of course, 'Fair Go' was the programme given the chop.

      Because here’s the thing: this is who we are. We are still the same people who believed in building a better version of the worlds we left behind. Still the same people who voted for Savage. For Kirk. For a fair go. for dignity, for everyone.

      I wish I could agree with you. At an individual level, many of us still are, but when it comes to the crunch, that neoliberal conditioning of it's all about me seems to trump everything else. 'Sure I care about society but I care more about paying less tax.'

      If NZ really was a fair country, the election results would reflect that. But they don't.

      • Res Publica 6.1.1
        1 September 2025 at 4:12 pm

        I wish I could agree with you. At an individual level, many of us still are, but when it comes to the crunch, that neoliberal conditioning of it's all about me seems to trump everything else. 'Sure I care about society but I care more about paying less tax.'

        Aristotle said nobody chooses evil for its own sake. Instead, we act based on what we believe is good. Kiwis aren’t enabling poverty on purpose; they’ve been sold a false story: that helping your neighbour somehow robs you.

        But our values as a country aren’t that fragile. If we can reframe fairness from “I keep what I earn” back to “we all get a fair shot," it’s a message that will land with everyone.

        Because, at the end of the day, this is really an argument over who the real New Zealand is. And if we ask our fellow Kiwis to look deep inside their souls, they’ll know the answer.

        And it won’t be David Seymour.

        • Kay 6.1.1.1
          1 September 2025 at 4:33 pm

          Kiwis aren’t enabling poverty on purpose; they’ve been sold a false story: that helping your neighbour somehow robs you.

          What I cannot understand is why so many NZers have fallen for this false story. Why do people who say they care about social justice and community let this keep happening. And continue to vote against society's best interests?

          Aristotle said nobody chooses evil for its own sake. Instead, we act based on what we believe is good.

          Anyone who continues to vote for political parties who have a well established and known track record for doing a lot of harm are, by definition, choosing evil. Apologies to Aristotle if I've misinterpreted him a bit.

          • Res Publica 6.1.1.1.1
            1 September 2025 at 4:41 pm

            Apologies to Aristotle if I've misinterpreted him a bit.

            Given that he wrote the Nicomachean Ethics a couple of millennia ago, I doubt he’d mind a little reinterpretation.

            But the truth still stands: people aren’t voting for the coalition because they want to cause harm. They’ve simply been told that everyone is ultimately alone, and that pursuing your own self-interest is the only “right” thing to do.

            Our job isn’t to write these people off. It’s to tell a better story.

            One that reminds us we rise or fall together. That no man is an island. That no New Zealander should ever be left alone in the cold and the dark.

            Because the moment we start treating half the country as the enemy, we start abandoning the very values we claim to defend.

            .

            • feijoa 6.1.1.1.1.1
              1 September 2025 at 7:48 pm

              I agree with what you say Res. Better stories, yes.

              In addition, we are living in a meritocracy. The rich believe they deserve their wealth and privilege. They worked hard – blah, blah, blah. Believing this brings in the opposite corollary, that the poor deserve to be where they are too. I think alot of NZers think the poor are lazy and hopeless. This is a tricky narrative to turn around, but it could be done.

              Another thing many don't realise is how inequality affects everybody. Even the rich. The Spirit Level (book), outlines this clearly. It is in everyone's interests to have a more equal society.