Written By:
- Date published:
8:09 am, November 21st, 2025 - 35 comments
Categories: act, chris bishop, Christopher Luxon, coalition of chaos, david seymour, nz first, winston peters -
Tags:
The fracture lines are showing.
Winston Peters is misbehaving big time. The goal may be to drive Act down so that NZ First is the go to coalition partner either for National or Labour depending on the poll result.
A week ago he said that there was a tawdry silly argument in favour of National’s proposal to sell assets.
Then yesterday he went full nuclear and said that NZ First would repeal Act’s odious Regulatory Standards Act, if it gets the change.
This is not what you would describe as Coalition Mana enhancing behaviour.
From Anneke Smith at Radio New Zealand:
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has vowed to repeal the Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) if re-elected next year.
It’s prompted the bill’s key proponent, ACT leader David Seymour, to warn Peters could be jumping ship to Labour.
Peters told Radio Waatea’s Dale Husband he wanted the bill gone earlier on Thursday, having voted it through its third reading this time last week.
“It was their deal, the ACT Party’s deal with the National Party. We were opposed to this from the word go but you’ve only got so many cards you can play.
“We did our best to neutralise its adverse effects and we will campaign at the next election to repeal it.”
David Seymour did not take this well. Again from Radio New Zealand:
Seymour said it was a “pretty worrying” development.
“That’s Labour’s position. It sounds like he’s getting ready to go with Labour again.
“This is a landmark piece of legislation that ACT would never vote to get rid of so if he wants to do that, he’s got to go with Labour.
“What’s more, for the best interests of New Zealand, we need to get on top of red tape and regulation. It’s making us poorer. It’s ruining lives. It’s ruining our country and the Regulatory Standards Act is there to do exactly that; cut the red tape long term.”
Asked if he thought Peters was respecting the conventions of Cabinet, Seymour said it was an interesting question.
“Frankly, the government’s position is to have the Regulatory Standards Act and continue to develop it.
“I would have thought of all the things we could be focused on right now for New Zealand, it would be how do we get the cost of living under control, get some economic activity back, rather than speculating about what you might do in another scenario that the voters haven’t even had a say on yet.”
Publicly Christopher Luxon is not worried. Privately he must be very worried.
And when asked Chris Bishop did not rule out a future repeal of the Act which when you think of it is a really strange thing to say. Clearly parties of the right would eat their offspring for political advantage.
Stand by. This is only going to get worse. The chances of an early election just went up a few notches.
I do not know why people vote for NZ First,
policy ? zilch
what is certain , Winston will make mischief.
There is policy from NZ First. Winston is a past master of seizing on populist policies – and then making sure they are contained in the coalition agreement if he is in government.
The issue is that the policies are largely disconnected – and fail to achieve (or even attempt) a coherent whole.
That may not be so much of an issue with a small party – where, realistically, their economic policy (for example) is going to be subsumed by that of their larger coalition partner.
So, picking out plums to assure your voters that their concerns matter – is absolutely a viable strategy for Peters. As is his ability to distance himself from unpopular policies championed by other coalition members.
But, more importantly, it's the cult of personality. Peters has massive amounts of charisma (no, of course that doesn't work on everyone) – and a very large swathe of NZF voters are really Winston voters. They trust him to make the right call.
Which is why I don't believe NZF will survive Peters retirement (just like New Labour died when Anderton retired)
But, in the last two coalition governments NZF and Peters have not been bad coalition partners. They've been stable, and, love him or hate him, Peters has been an excellent Foreign Minister. NZF voters are more likely to reward than punish Peters at the next election.
New Labour was over before Anderton retired. The party broke up and became a 2 MP party dependent on his electorate seat.
Quite right. My bad for forgetting the new 'party' he established: "Jim Anderton's Progressive Party" – which was the one which died when he retired in 2011. They didn't even bother to field candidates in the subsequent election (the one where Anderton endorsed Woods (Labour) for his electorate seat), and was de-registered (at it's own request) in 2012.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Anderton%27s_Progressive_Party
Whoever coined the phrase "the Coalition of Chaos" deserves a knighthood.
I watched Seymour on TV last night. More interested in his body language than what he was saying. There he was in his big boy pants, nicely coiffured and inwardly seething with incandescent rage. It's going to be a very rough ride from now until the next election no matter when it occurs. Bring it on!
I prefer the "Coalition of Cockups"!
Hard to think of anything they have done that is not a fuckup.
Of course, deliberately fucking up State provision, to justify flogging it off to private capital, has a very long and shameful history.
It’s a Coalition of Collapse; almost everything they do collapses, even their own Coalition of Convenience.
I prefer Coalition of Charlatans – Ponzi scheme scammers and snake oil merchants.
Someone did not even wait for the coalition to form.
Luxon and Willis were enough in May 2023.
https://thestandard.nz/the-real-coalition-of-chaos/
Incredibly unlikely.
NZ voters traditionally punish heavily parties which call an early election. There is no way that either Seymour or Peters would risk it.
Especially as both will be looking to enhance their prospects over the next 6 months. Peters to capitalize on and bed in his surge of support; Seymour to claw back the current drop in support.
And probably no way Luxury Luxon would risk it either. After all, the best he could realistically hope for at the moment would be another CoC – but then that would be another three years of government by and for the sorted. So maybe?
https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-business-units/cabinet-office/supporting-work-cabinet/cabinet-manual/6-elections-transitions-and-government-formation/early-election
The last time Aotearoa New Zealand had an early, or 'snap' election, was when PM Muldoon spit the dummy over MPs who wouldn't tow the National party line.
Oh, I agree that Luxon wouldn't risk it either – it's just that he wasn't the one involved in the headline spat.
The Muldoon legacy is chilling in a whole lot of ways…..
I agree it’s very unlikely. Early elections in NZ usually only happen when there’s a fundamental breakdown that makes the existing arrangement unworkable. There’s nothing like that here.
In the MMP era, it has only happened once. In 2002 Labour went early because the Alliance had split so badly that the coalition couldn’t realistically function any longer. That kind of existential rupture just isn’t present with ACT or NZ First right now. Both Peters and Seymour have every incentive to stabilise things and maximise their own support over the next 6–12 months, not blow up the government.
There’s no real issue on the table that would justify, or politically reward triggering an early election.
Out of interest have there been any early elections other than 1951 post the waterfront strike, Muldoon in 1984, and H Clarke in 2002(?)
Think that's it. Both recent ones (i.e. in my living memory) a disaster for the government in power. Of course, the disaster would probably have happened even if they'd waited for the full term of the government; but the electorate certainly didn't reward them….
It's not a pathway that any political party wants to go down.
That's Labour's position from Seymour is priceless.
ACT has policies that are not held by National and could not get into their agreement.
So they are not those of the coalition agreement.
He now knows there are policies in that agreement that NZF opposed back then.
If he was unaware that Peters wanted the last 18 months to make this known, and do so while Seymour was deputy PM – well welcome to the game chump.
Yes and Seymour's left himself exposed as the BS, arrogance and an amateur level of execution draws attention to it to in true Arnold J Rimmer style.
Did a simple calculation: last election figures:
Nat/ACT/NZ1 67 seats
Lab/Green/TPM 55 seats.
If NZ1 leave Coalition (be it voluntary or involuntary) that would change to
Nat/ACT 59 seats
Lab/Green/TPM 55 seats,
In the event of a Motion of No Confidence in the Govt., the result could fall:
Nat/ACT 59
Lab/Green/TPM/NZ1 63 – if NZ1 choose not to abstain.
If the 2 TPM expelled members choose to abstain, that would still give the parties outside government a majority of two.
That would surely mean a snap election?
Check my figures by all means. Got to run.
Meanwhile, in the real world – what's in it for Peters?
If you're envisaging a principled withdrawal from the coalition over this issue – I invite you to consider who you are dealing with.
This is all about pre-positioning for election year, next year – not about the current government.
There would be zero benefit in Peters collapsing the government – and lots of potential risk. Why would he?
Peters, the wily old goat, will say anything to get himself over the threshold each election.
What, he does afterward, is only sometimes consistent with the rhetoric.
Exactly, he's an utter liability and is only interested in job security…his own ..whatever it takes
I think looking at political discourse in Aotearoa over the last 6-12 months that's been increasingly apparent. ACT, NZ1 and National have been in near full electoral mode for a long time. My feeds get daily posts at similar rates to the election campaign, strangely ACT and Nat are getting hammered in comments, NZF not so much. They look to be expecting it and ready to go at a moment's notice
I just hope Labour, Green Party and TPM are similarly prepared. It'd be sad if National went early on the hope / knowledge that they had an advantage and succeeded. Sometimes I wonder if NACT1 (or parts thereof) aren't trying to engineer that situation.
Get ready folks.
Recently received a glossy National party pamphlet in my letterbox, despite the No Junk Mail sign. "National is getting NZ back on track", and delivering – apparently.
Had to laugh, because the front panel shows a beaming Willux (probably no AI involved – still made me feel a bit queasy) beneath a QR code and a large 'NO'. But that was just my poor eyesight – closer inspection of the 'O' revealed it to be the NZ House of Representatives crest.
Loved this comment: "A pamphlet in the mail. That’s what they’ve delivered."
Just say NO to the NAct track.
A lot of them have Parliamentary Services crest on them, but the form / appearance of electioneering. Suppose if it's not within a formal election period that's ok?
There's a pretty much zero chance of an early election. Winston has proven to be a very reliable coalition partner over successive govts.
Winston has already said it's not a bottom line on the radio this morning so it's more like a cunning ploy to differentiate himself from Act and the Nats, get in the news cycle, attract a bit more of the center or left of centre vote looking to moderate Act or Nat and give himself some leverage in any coalition negotiations.
Labour should archive that radio.
Not a bottom line, means it is tradeable.
The public, knowing that, should not vote for him because he is anti RSB.
He has admitted it would remain policy if the coalition returned in 2026.
The Regulatory Standards Act will come into force on 1 January 2026. Already, Winston Peters has declared it a dog, yet he let the dog out, and now says he’ll kill that dog when given a chance, when he clearly had a chance and he blew it. This is dog-whistling at bat-crazy frequency.
seymour probably should keep his mouth shut given the coc has tanked nz ,are blatantly trying to shaft workers and and steel what's left of value, and the Maori party are sunk, winston going back to a labour government isn't sounding so bad.
Sure hope the Greens have got something else in the tank because NZF are overtaking them in poll tracker, and preparing to peak in election year.
NZF gifted us Ardern and Robertson, instead of English. But they are very, very hard to manage in coalition and Luxon is far weaker than Ardern.
But NZF with a 12-13% MP count would be an insufferable proposition.
Jamie Ensor in the NZHERALD this morning had the same idea:
Labour and NZFirst have a lot in common.
They have more in common than Labour and the Greens.
I haven't seen Winston in better form since bringing down the Shipley government.
And the Herald really has the interests of the Left at heart (sarc)
They want the Left to be nullified by forming a coalition with the anti-woke anti-vaccine anti-environment pro fossil fuel (drill baby drill) anti-CGT anti-renewable energy anti-public transport (Peters stopped light-rail) lying** dinosaurs in NZF.
Is this what we really want? Give me the Greens any day.
**Peters lied about the ferry deal
100% – Winston First is a serial flip-flopper. NAct, with it’s self-serving ‘values’, and its divisive contempt for 'bottom feeder' and 'dropkick', 'flipped' a willing Winston, and it’s taken only two years to speed-wreck NZ Aotearoa 🙁
My heart says 'Never treat with Winston again', and my head says 'wthout him, Jacinda Ardern would never have been PM.'
Just playing with numbers.
Should TPM win 1 electorate with 3% Pary vote, that should give them 4 seats.
Which would mean Labour + Green needs to equal 48% to gain 58 seats. 62 seats for a left wing government.
Not implausible at all.
Given typical discarded votes of ~5%, 45-46% would probably be enough.
I think TPM will win most of the Maori seats again. The memories of the Te Tiriti march will still be strong in 2026.