Greens or Te Pāti Māori? Indigenous representation, trickle-down, and where to hold difficult conversations

How are you feeling about the New Zealand election now?

I’m a little irritated at the Ministry of Education at the moment, in terms of how they are treating teachers, particularly in an election year. Likewise with the Ministry of Health—I know a few people who have been impacted by shortages of doctors, long waiting list, and poor conditions.

If you were to vote today, who would you vote for?

When I first voted I voted National, but my perspective has changed quite a bit since then! Since then, I’ve voted for Greens, and that’s probably because of my own personal persuasion about what works and long-term solutions. I like what the Greens are doing in this election as well, such as the attention they are drawing to homelessness and other pressing issues like fairness in the rental market. But then I’ve also wanted more Māori representation for a while. (I’m aware the Greens also have Māori representation but I think there is still something unique that Te Pati Maori stand for.) At the same time, increased Māori representation makes me a bit nervous as well, though I’m aware much of that comes from privilege and not knowing enough; having to relinquish power and influential is quite threatening. I’ve studied our current system and I’m quite convinced of its merits. I like the current Parliamentary system and so the idea of change is scary. But then again, is that fair for me to keep thinking this way, because it's asking Māori people to keep operating in a Western system that has completely failed them? So it seems I should allow for some uncertainty. We should also consider the examples we have of more Māori leadership, such as the water management boards. This has led to cleaner waters and more equitable decision making. If transferring stewardship to Maori has had really positive outcome, then I can’t keep hiding behind my fear of the unknown. I was also challenge recently with the question, ‘when is the right time to start voting for Māori representation?’ Is it even about waiting until the Maori party has policies that align perfectly with what I want? Or is it more about questions of longer-term justice, the importance of Maori representation despite the particular policies they are supporting in each election cycle? So, if I had to vote today, I’d be tossing up between Greens but also Te Pāti Māori. I’m very torn, and I’m hoping that there is some way to divide up my support between both.

What are the core principles that drive your voting decision?

I quite like parties that are idealistic but that also try to be quite practical. If I’m honest, I do look at the leadership quite a bit. I did really like Jacinda. She seemed honest and had a lot of integrity, and that was quite influential for me. The bigger issue is probably more what I’m not convinced by, than what I am. Because I do find various perspectives from a range of parties convincing. But others much less so! For example, I’m not convinced that trickle-down economics works, or tough-on-crime policies.

Let’s take the trickle-down economics example. Why do you think people who believe in this idea vote for it?

I think that people who vote for this economic approach are often very hard-working and have earned their way up. So there is sometimes a perspective that ‘if I have done it, everyone should be able to’. There is also, in my experience, an over-trust in the fairness of the world that doesn’t always play out in reality. Or an over-emphasis on the ability of people to foresee any possible issue and to control the world around them. This goes right back to the underlying assumption of capitalisms, that if you make a deal then it’s a deal. But I personally think we are shaped by so many things that are really complicated, including what we perceive to be possible. So you can’t just look at the face value in a contract. Are there any power dynamic at play? If so, this messes with the fairness of the market. And some of these unfair dynamics are powerful and deeply rooted in history. Just leaving the market free to do its thing ignores the important realities of human relationships, and the imbalances of power at the starting line of many of these societal relationships and structures.

How do you think someone with a more right-wing economic perspective would perceive the Greens’ approach?

I think they probably see it as impractical, that’s the classic phrase from National and Act. A part of me understands that perspective: sometimes Labour and Greens do make poor economic decisions, and they don’t always do enough to convince voters on the Right. For other voters, I imagine the Greens’ approach is seen as limiting freedom; that tends to be the stance of parties like Act. But I would want to add here, that even though we have focussed on economics in these last few questions, I don’t agree that economics is the most important issue, anyway.

What would you see as most important?

The biggest issues for me are around caring for the most vulnerable, the people who are most marginalised by society. Homelessness is a big one; the numbers are too high and they are getting worse, and I don’t think we can depend on rich people getting richer to solve this! I would also want to focus on gender minority and issues around caring for the earth.

How do you see the state of political discussion?

The short answer is that I’m a little worried. It seems to me like people on every side are becoming less and less able to talk to each other, less and less tolerant. And there are fewer and fewer institutions that actively encourage these difficult conversations across political divides. Universities are one place; but the Arts, where such conversation should be core to what they provide, are being slowly defunded. Community and religious groups have traditionally offered spaces for conversations across societal divides. Yet these groups are shrinking, or becoming just as siloed and polarised, and so they are offering less of a common meeting place for these kinds of conversations.

The thing is that these kinds of important conversations are not easy. It takes an awful lot of maturity to sit with a person who really disagrees with you and hear them out. My deeper concern is that we don’t have enough time in today’s world to develop the skills of listening to each other. Maybe it’s not even valued highly enough. If you live in a world that is about costs versus benefits—evaluating whether the numbers justify a course of action—then how do you account for principles like sitting in the room with someone and listening to them as they challenge you? It is not easy, and it’s not ‘backed by numbers’. For most of the time people do not want to be challenged. Most people won’t see the social benefit. Unless, of course, you’ve studied what happens in societies when these conversations stop happening.

Do you think social media can offer one of these spaces for difficult conversations? I used to think social media could be that place but I’m not sure anymore. Social media is a real blessing in many ways, but I do worry about the siloing effect and people not being fully cognisant of how the algorithms work. I also worry that people aren’t getting the full story and that misinformation is being spread … and then when experts challenge that misinformation they are being labelled any number of different things. I think Covid helped expose how bad this was all getting. There’s also the fact that lots of social media platforms are backed by pretty powerful people, and they have their own particular perspectives. But maybe things can get better. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few years around limitations on social media companies, if there can be some sense of greater good attached these platforms.