Anne Salmond: Our Govt policies are ‘weird’ too

Comment: In the US, Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz set off a social media storm by calling Donald Trump and his Republican devotees ‘weird.’ 
After watching Trump’s speech at the Republican convention, in which he invoked the Almighty, Hannibal Lecter and Kim Jong Un, adding, ‘Its nice to get along with someone who has a lot of nuclear weapons,’ applauded by adoring Wisconsin delegates wearing large wedges of Swiss cheese on their heads, you’d have to agree.
In New Zealand, Vernon Small in the Post likewise described our coalition government as ‘deeply weird,’ because many of its policy pitches also defy logic – cutting tax on tobacco to reduce harm from smoking; preaching democracy while seeking ministerial autocracy; slashing hospital budgets to cut waiting lists; a war on red road cones while engaging with climate denial; slamming civil servants, teachers, the health system, the economy – anyone but politicians who make Faustian bargains in the pursuit of power.
Again, its hard to disagree. There’s something very strange about this ‘three-headed taniwha.’ I thought so after the last election, as I watched a video of Lord Hannan, a Tory peer from England and one of the authors of Brexit, addressing members of the new NZ coalition cabinet, who chortled approvingly as he praised them for aiming to cut government expenditure below 30 percent of GDP, when in Britain its 49 percent, and the health system and other public services in that country are collapsing.
Hailing his host, Jordan Williams of the Taxpayers’ Union, as the ‘capo di tutti i capi’ (mafia ‘Godfather’) of the global taxpayers’ movement, Hannan delivered a lecture on Te Tiriti o Waitangi (which he can’t read), warning the coalition ministers against the threats to equality posed by inherited privilege – and this from a Tory-appointed Lord! For an incoming government in New Zealand to seek advice on such a topic from such a source seemed bizarre indeed.
Hannan’s performance, riddled as it was with oxymorons, nevertheless prefigured many of the coalition policies that Vernon Small talks about – preaching equality while increasing radical inequality; hailing democracy while expanding executive power; or the coalition’s use of the Treaty to try and incite culture wars in New Zealand. British Tories and twerking the Treaty as models for good governance in New Zealand? To quote the Tui ad, ‘Yeah right.’
Decrying ‘woke’ policies combined with a turn towards autocracy is not just weird, but dangerous.  In the United States, a populist appeal to autocracy led to the 2020 attack on the Capitol, and may lead to more violence in 2024.  In the United Kingdom, far right groups are sparking riots across the country. Inter-group hostility combined with radical inequality, autocracy, anti-environment policies and climate denial are a toxic mix.
Is this what Kiwis voted for in the last election?  I doubt it. As Sir John Key tried to warn National at their recent AGM, democracy is not about letting small, right wing parties – or their think tanks – steer the ship of state. Allowing ACT, with just 8.6% of the vote, to rewrite Te Tiriti according to Lord Hannan’s libertarian precepts; or imitating the kind of austerity politics that bought the UK economy to its knees; or at the behest of populist NZ First, with just 6% of the vote, declaring war on the environment that underpins the New Zealand economy is not just bizarre, but self-defeating.
In the UK, the electorate rejected the Tories at the last election, and in the US, if voters reject Donald Trump in November, a small, remote island nation ineptly harnessed to right wing agendas will find itself vulnerable and isolated.  Race wars ring alarm bells, an all-out assault on the environment trashes our ‘clean green’ reputation for tourists and purchasers of primary produce, and climate denial puts major markets at risk.  Such policies cast a pall over New Zealand, threatening national prosperity and cohesion.
To see how far the political process is failing us at present, put Parliament alongside New Zealand’s Olympic squad of sportsmen and women, both representing this country at home and abroad.  On the one side, skill of the highest order in many fields, modesty and generosity of spirit.  On the other, a lack of moderation, ineptitude in many portfolios, cynical manipulation of the rules, too much power for fringe parties and too many rampant egos.
As the UK economist David Susskind notes, if a nation wants prosperity, it must establish “new political institutions that are capable of creating a space where there can be greater deliberation among citizens about difficult choices.”
Its time for New Zealand to join the 21st Century. Parliament needs radical reform to constrain executive autocracy, limit the influence of lobbyists and funders, tackle conflicts of interest and ensure more informed decision-making, based on deliberative debate, impartial advice and the weight of evidence.  Its current processes – including the balance of powers under MMP – are no longer fit for purpose.
As in many successful small nation states, complex challenges such as climate change, the Treaty and the taxation required to deliver high quality health, education and other services might be addressed by citizens’ assemblies, marae meetings, mini-publics or other deliberative processes, before policies are finalised and enacted. Perhaps a leadership programme for aspiring MPs to train them in policy analysis, debate and public service, or a youth Parliament, might capture some of the Olympian spirit.
Such processes would help to reduce those ‘deeply weird’ policy pitches that cause so much consternation, and deliver astute, informed and insightful governance to New Zealand. Then young Kiwis might find a future here, and we might have a country to be proud of again.