Dunne over
Peter Dunne has taken a beating at the hands of the media over the past two weeks. A man who staked his reputation on reasonableness and moderation has been slammed as petulant, ridiculous, arrogant, presumptuous, too-big-for-his-boots, and many more besides. I almost feel sorry for him. Almost.
In any case, I’m very glad to see him come down from the ledge and start talking more like a leader and whose party has just been smacked around by the electorate. The Press reports:
Dunne said he accepted United Future did not have much clout with only three MPs. Labour could form a government with the support of the Greens, NZ First, and the Maori Party, he said.
“They don’t actually need us.”
Dunne said while his view of the Greens had not changed, his stance that United Future would not work with the Greens in government had been “widely misinterpreted” as blackmail. “Somebody only had to work out the numbers to see that I was stating a viewpoint. I had no right or authority to do anything more than that.
“It’s not a question of whether it’s OK with me. We’re a small player in all of this. We have very limited influence. They don’t actually need us to do anything. So I’m not in a position to be exercising any form of sanction.”
Such humility is better late than never, and Dunne deserves praise for changing his tune.
I am, however, very intrigued by Dunne’s suggestion that he should have said during the election campaign that United was “more actively disposed” towards working with National. While he is saying that he doesn’t mean to suggest that he wanted National to win, I can’t see how this position can be interpreted any other way.
Being “more actively disposed” towards working with National means you’re “less actively disposed” towards working with Labour. This means you’d rather work with National than Labour. And, assuming you’d rather be an influence on government than not, this means you’d rather National leads the next government than Labour.
All of which goes a long way to explaining Dunne’s actions on election night. He has been hoping for a National victory, and the Cabinet post that that implied. On election night, those hopes were cruelly raised, only to be dashed. His outburst, while unbecoming of a leader who calls himself reasonable, was probably quite understandable.
September 30th, 2005 at 10:42 am
Calling him a leader is a bit extreme don’t you think?
September 30th, 2005 at 11:22 am
I looked at his statements and wondered whether he’s positioning himself to refuse blanket confidence and supply for Labour. He could justify it thus:
1) They don’t need it.
2) We always said we couldn’t work with the Greens.
Therefore we can stick with to our principles (tick) and not hamper stable government (tick) and demand things in return for other things on an issue-by-issue basis (tick).
So he gets
a) power;
b) to set himself up as the anti-Greens (which would probably be a stronger brand than his current one), and;
c) still seem to be a stabilising centre party.
September 30th, 2005 at 2:41 pm
Anita:
I’m very much afraid that your “wondering” is a very perceptive prediction … that will turn out to be depressingly accurate.
eredwen
September 30th, 2005 at 6:21 pm
And then there’s the alternate view, the one where Dunne has exhausted all his policy-spouting energy during the campaign and election night vitupurations, and is left mute and anodyne for the next 3 years.
well, I can hope, can’t I?
September 30th, 2005 at 10:02 pm
Well, he knows that Helen won’t have him in any way, shape or form : first, because he jumped ship, expecting her to lose; and second, because she doesn’t need him.
He’s just going to sit tight in opposition for three years, keeping his options open, hoping National will need him next time.
He can be expected to target the Greens and Green-inspired measures at every opportunity, so as to portray himself as Mr Sensible against the dangerous extremists (actually I think he’s probably too sensible to actually believe the gibberish he spouts about us : it’s just a stance)
This is good, it will keep us on our toes, and ensure that our issues are debated.
We know Dunne needs the Greens : perhaps we need him too? (or at least, he’s not altogether as useless as he looks)
September 30th, 2005 at 10:03 pm
NZFirst will survive Winston, in one form or other.
It fulfills a structural need in NZ politics : a home for unfocused malcontents. It’s the modern Social Credit.
September 30th, 2005 at 10:49 pm
(oops wrong thread)