Instead of being beholden to their left and right flanks respectively, Labour and National might prefer to stick to the centre. Sure, it means working with the old foe, but the policy ground would be much more comfortable to occupy.
Opinion: "The Ayes are 91, the Noes are 22, the question is agreed to," Parliament’s Assistant Speaker Greg O’Connor intoned from his chair last night after MPs cast their votes on a transport bill. The business of Parliament lumbered on. Just one of many votes on matters mostly ignored by the media and the public.
But if we look closely at how the votes were cast for and against this particular piece of legislation, there is something interesting to be found. Those 91 votes in favour came from National and Labour while the 22 against came from ACT, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori plus the two MPs now technically independent. National and Labour on one side, everybody else on the other.
If that comes as a surprise, you may be stunned to find that it’s not an especially rare occurrence. More often, parties vote unanimously, or all but one party votes the same way, but National and Labour combining against everybody else happens often enough that not a single eyebrow is raised when it does.
READ MORE: * The potential coalition complications for major parties * Why a grand coalition was unthinkable
The fact is, on all manner of issues, Labour and National are often the two parties whose views are in greatest alignment while the other parties, for usually vastly different reasons, vote in opposition to the Big Two.
If National and Labour can often vote together so easily, is it terribly difficult to imagine them working together as a grand coalition government? Well, yes. But only because it has never happened in New Zealand.
In Germany, the country with the most similar parliamentary system to New Zealand’s, grand coalitions have held power for most of the 21st Century.
From 2005 to 2009 and from 2013 to 2021, Angela Merkel led grand coalition governments made up of her own centre-right Christian Democratic Union, their sister party the Christian Social Union of Bavaria, and the centre-left Social Democratic Party. Reviews of these governments’ achievements are naturally mixed. But it is undeniable they were able to provide stable governance for considerable periods of time.
Some of the conditions that enabled the German grand coalitions are present as we head toward the New Zealand General Election in October.
Good things take time. If solutions have been crafted by both Labour and National, they have a better chance of surviving beyond the life of any one government.
The combined support for the two main parties is falling as voters turn in greater numbers towards the Act party, the Greens, Te Pāti Māori, and NZ First. On current projections, if either main party is able to form a government with its natural allies, they will each be working with one or more parties that are in much stronger bargaining positions than usual.
Instead of being beholden to their left and right flanks respectively, Labour and National might prefer to stick to the centre. Sure, it means working with the old foe, but the policy ground would be much more comfortable to occupy.
We may well elect a parliament in which neither the left nor right blocks can secure a majority. A hung parliament with each bloc holding 60 seats is entirely possible. So too is the re-election of NZ First, leaving both blocs short of 61 seats. A Labour, Green, Māori, NZ First combination is impossible. A National, ACT, NZ First combination is challenging. Not having to deal with Winston Peters could be a strong motivator for both National and Labour to do a deal.
Wicked problems
Would a grand coalition be a good thing for New Zealand? There are plenty of reasons to hope so.
We face some wicked problems right now. Climate change, wealth inequality, inflation, housing accessibility, some crime rates, healthcare delivery, inadequate transport infrastructure, declining educational attainment, the list goes on.
Finding genuine, lasting solutions could be better achieved by National and Labour working together and applying Integrative Thinking – constructively using opposing ideas to build new, superior solutions. There would be tension, but that is actually healthy if everyone is truly committed to finding solutions that work for everyone, not just their own party's base.
Good things take time. If solutions have been crafted by both Labour and National, they have a better chance of surviving beyond the life of any one government. Policies implemented could be monitored and only changed when the data indicates improvements need to be made rather than for purely political reasons.
We need our best minds working on solutions and governing our nation. Drawing the top talent from both major parties could significantly improve the overall calibre of the executive. The ability to work constructively with others would become a sought after skill at the Cabinet table.
Policy certainty is cherished by businesses and investors. If Labour and National can create more certainty about infrastructure plans, climate policy, tax policy and other areas of interest to investors then we are likely to see the capital the country needs to thrive find its way into projects that support jobs and sustainable development.
Falling out of love with centrism
So yes, a grand coalition could definitely be good for our nation. But let’s not be naive. There’s also plenty to dislike about the prospect of a supermajority government.
Current polling would suggest we are falling out of love with the centrism of the Big Two. The combined Labour and National vote has fallen to around 65 percent and continues to trend downwards.
We increasingly want bold action. We can’t decide if we want Act’s version of that, or the Green and Māori parties’ variety. Nevertheless, a government that excludes all of those parties could feel like a worst-of-all-worlds outcome that works for nobody.
In fact the medium term outcome could be even worse than that. If frustration sets in, more of us could feel motivated to seek out politicians offering extreme solutions to our woes – not just in the form of the parties already in Parliament, but those that currently inhabit the fringes. By sticking to the centre now, we could open the door to parties many of us consider genuinely dangerous entering Parliament and even government.
Probably the greatest risk is that combining the ideologies and personalities of two rival parties would simply result in total stagnation. While they could work together and be incredibly innovative, do any of us trust them to do that? Is it not more likely they will argue themselves to a standstill and achieve nothing while problems go unsolved?
Rather than working together on innovative, new solutions, the path of least resistance would most likely be to find compromise positions somewhere between each party’s policy position. That’s unlikely to adequately deal with the challenges we face or build lasting policy that sets us up for future success.
A strong and functioning Opposition inside Parliament is actually vital to a healthy democracy. It holds the Government to account and proposes alternative ideas for voters to consider. Reducing the Opposition to a collection of disparate voices totally outnumbered in Parliament would make it especially difficult for them to carry out their constitutional function. Our democracy would be poorer for it and the Government near unaccountable until the election.
A grand coalition probably won’t form after the upcoming election but if ever there was time it could happen, it’s now.
There are plenty of arguments that it wouldn’t be in our best interests and, of course, many of us just hate the idea because it involves at least one party we intensely dislike. But that doesn’t mean we should rule it out. Done well, it could be just what the country needs to tackle the range and enormity of challenges in front of us. It could represent us all working together – something hopeful to dream of in these polarised times.
If nothing else, it’s something different to talk about.
