Does New Zealand need a center party?
I would say like air to breathe, but lets unpack this…
In a world increasingly polarized by left and right ideologies, the case for a centrist party in New Zealand presents a compelling opportunity for political moderation and innovation. However, there seem to be some misconceptions about the centre in New Zealand, and I’m keen to challenge that.
I grew up mostly in Mexico, where a centrist government reigned for seventy years. So, I've come to appreciate the potential of centrist governance. This experience, juxtaposed with my 13 years in New Zealand, where there seems to be an idea that centre parties lack conviction or are flaky, is interesting.
Despite knowing that winning was unlikely, one of my motivations for running for Wellington Central in the 2023 election was to aim to neutralise the polarized left and right narrative during the debates. Demonstrate what a centre party sounds, looks and thinks like.
New Zealand's political discourse has long been confined within a binary framework, often dismissing the centre as lacking conviction. Yet, it is precisely within this middle ground that I believe we can find nuanced, informed, and unifying solutions to our most pressing challenges. This post aims to dismantle the misconceptions surrounding centrist politics and articulate why a centrist party is not only viable but necessary for New Zealand's future.
The Case for Centrism in New Zealand
Social Cohesion
Over the last decade, New Zealand has witnessed a growing polarization, with political views veering towards the extremes. This radicalization threatens our social fabric, undermining the trust and solidarity essential for coexistence. By championing moderation, a centrist party can bridge this divide politically, fostering a more inclusive and cohesive society. It is hard to have conversations about big issues today, and if we do not get on top of these hard conversations, it will further erode our capacity to solve them.
Innovative Governance
New Zealand's political scene is ripe for innovation. A centrist approach can catalyze a shift from divisive rhetoric to collaborative problem-solving. By focusing on pragmatic policies that require cross-spectrum cooperation, a centrist party can encourage politicians to prioritize action over ideology, leading to more effective governance.
Centrist parties can introduce new policy ideas that blend approaches from both sides of the political spectrum, potentially leading to innovative solutions to complex issues.
Strengthening MMP
In New Zealand's MMP system, coalitions are often necessary to form a government. A centrist party could play a pivotal role in coalition governments, acting as a kingmaker and ensuring stability.
MMP representation system, while enhancing political diversity, has also led to disproportionate influence by smaller parties. A centrist party could recalibrate this dynamic, promoting a more equitable and representative political dialogue. By advocating for collaboration over confrontation, such a party would reinforce the MMP's foundational goal of broad-based representation.
The transformation towards a more centrist political landscape begins with the electorate. Civic education and engagement are crucial in empowering voters to transcend traditional ideological boundaries. By engaging with diverse perspectives, questioning our political preconceptions, and critically evaluating information, New Zealanders can lay the groundwork for a more inclusive and balanced political discourse.
The Case Against Centrism in New Zealand
Despite the potential benefits, the path to establishing a successful centrist party is fraught with challenges. Historical and international examples, such as the Center party in Israel and the Republican People's Party in Turkey, highlight the difficulties centrist movements face in overcoming entrenched political divisions and delivering on their promises. These cases underscore the importance of a clear, distinct vision and robust civic engagement in cultivating a successful centrist platform.
Dilution of Votes
A new centre party could fragment the vote, potentially diluting the support for major parties and complicating coalition formations. A centrist party in New Zealand could risk spreading the electorate too thin, particularly impacting the major parties—Labour and National. For example, New Zealand First party, often seen as a centrist or populist party, has historically played a kingmaker role but has also been accused of diluting votes, leading to unpredictable coalition dynamics.
A similar scenario unfolded during the 1993 elections, the last under the First Past the Post (FPP) system, where the vote was notably split, paving the way for the adoption of MMP. In a system designed to reflect a broader spectrum of political preferences, a new centrist party might further complicate coalition negotiations, echoing the difficulties seen in past election cycles where no single party could form a government outright.
Overcrowding the Political Space
New Zealand's political landscape already includes parties occupying various political positions. Another party could overcrowd the space, making it harder for voters to make clear distinctions. From the Greens on the left to ACT on the right, with several smaller parties attempting to carve out their niches.
The introduction of The Opportunities Party (TOP) ahead of the 2017 general election serves as a pertinent example. Despite presenting innovative policy proposals aimed at appealing to centrist voters, TOP struggled to gain significant traction, illustrating the challenges new entrants face in differentiating themselves amidst a crowded field.
This overcrowding can lead to voter confusion and fatigue as electorates grapple with distinguishing between parties' overlapping platforms.
Compromise Over Clarity
While compromise is often seen as a strength, it can also be perceived as a lack of clear policy direction, making it difficult for the party to distinguish itself and mobilize support around strong, definitive policies.
Compromise is a hallmark of centrist politics, aiming to bridge the gap between opposing viewpoints. However, this approach may result in vague policy positions that lack the clarity and decisiveness found in more ideologically defined parties.
The United Future party, which positioned itself as a centrist option, often faced criticism for its perceived lack of strong policy direction, struggling to mobilize a consistent base of support.
This illustrates the delicate balance a centrist party must strike between being a conduit for compromise and maintaining a clear, compelling policy agenda that resonates with voters.
Electoral Viability
Given the thresholds required to enter Parliament under the MMP system, a new centrist party would need significant support to be electorally viable, which may be challenging to achieve. The impact of establishing a centre party in New Zealand would largely depend on its ability to articulate a clear vision that resonates with voters seeking an alternative to the existing major parties. It would also need to navigate the complexities of the MMP system effectively to secure representation in Parliament and influence policy.
Under New Zealand's MMP system, a party must either win an electorate seat or surpass the 5% party vote threshold to gain representation in Parliament. This requirement poses a significant hurdle for new parties, especially a centrist one aiming to siphon votes from across the political spectrum.
The experience of parties like the Conservative Party, which in 2014 missed the 5% threshold despite a substantial campaign, highlights the difficulties new entrants face in achieving the necessary electoral support. For a centrist party, this challenge is compounded by the need to appeal to a broad base of voters without alienating potential supporters by veering too close to the policies of existing parties.
In conclusion, the establishment of a centrist party in New Zealand represents a promising avenue towards a more moderate, cohesive, and innovative political future. However, its success hinges on the collective will of the electorate to embrace complexity, seek common ground, and prioritize the collective good over ideological purity. As we ponder the future of New Zealand's political landscape, let us consider the potential of the centre not as a compromise, but as a catalyst for unity and progress.
I think it really depends on how you define the 'center' of politics. The context of the country is important as the center of NZ and the center of the US are two very different centers. It also depends on what you stand for as a party, and how you view issues from the center. Is the center purely a place of compromise or can it define itself with its own issues and policies it stands for? Personally I view the center as an often naturally conservative adjacent position as it often seems to be a place of compromise between progressive and Conservative politics which seems to benefit Conservative politics far more often.
As a founding member of the SDP - Social Democratic Party in the UK during the 1980’s, I am all too aware of how difficult it is to get traction for a new party. General public recognition is the main problem. A well known group of faces helps. NZ also faces the problem of falling interest by younger people in civics, politics and social democracy. Little wonder when there is little difference between the two main parties. The shift towards more social justice rather than environmental policies by the Greens might be the route to activate younger people. From that might be the centrist party you advocate for. Best of luck, you will need it!