EDITORIAL: Jokes are rarely so good the second time around. Regular followers of New Zealand politics and his veteran prankster Winston Peters will recall an incident in 2018 in which Peters gathered reporters from the press gallery around him, pulled out his phone and performed a song called Bridges on fire.
It happened amid the fallout from Simon Bridges and Jami-Lee Ross, when it looked like Ross’s revelations could bring down his former friend. Peters chuckled happily and left.
KEVIN STENT / STUFF
Winston Peters faces questions from the media about the NZ First Foundation.
He tried the same trick again this week, but fewer people were laughing. When asked for comment on his connection to the secret photograph of two journalists, he again picked up his phone and played Radio Gaga.
But given the situation Peters found himself in, he could have found a more appropriate song from Queen. Under pressure, may be.
READ MORE:
* Jami-Lee Ross among four accused in the SFO National Party case
* National calls on PM to resign Winston Peters over SFO investigation
* Simon Bridges says he doesn’t know anything about the second donation of $ 100,050 to the SFO trial center
* Serious Fraud Office to investigate New Zealand’s first foundation
* Jacinda Ardern says first New Zealand scandal is not a priority, but rushes into meeting with Elton John
* Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters confirms, then denies any involvement in photographing journalists
There are growing calls for Peters, who is the Deputy Prime Minister and leader of coalition partner NZ First, to step down while the NZ First Foundation is investigated by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). The OFS is investigating the foundation after the electoral commission found that some donations to the foundation should have been declared by New Zealand’s First Party itself.
The Election Commission referred the matter to the police before it was quickly referred to the SFO.
SUPPLIED / GENE CHAO SHAN
Jami-Lee Ross, left, with Simon Bridges, Yikun Zhang and Colin Zheng. Ross, Zhang and Zheng have since been indicted by the SFO.
It would seem unlikely that Peters would continue to play his role while a foundation which has been described as “a sort of political slush fund for the main party, raising donor money and spending it on party-related expenses” is investigated.
And there is direct precedent for removing it. Just like the joke that was repeated, this scenario has already happened. Peters was persuaded to stand aside while the SFO investigated donations to NZ First in 2008. A media report said after an hour-long meeting with then-premier Helen Clark, the head of NZ First was “wounded but calm”.
“Mr. Peters thought about this very carefully,” Clark told reporters, making it very clear who was responsible and who would define the political narrative.
Clark looked strong and decisive, although she still lost the 2008 election and Peters was cleared by the SFO. You could argue that then-national leader John Key looked even more principled and decisive when he ruled out NZ First a few months earlier.
As we move quickly to 2020, we see that it is Peters who defines the narrative and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who is likely to appear weak. Why Ardern’s caution?
It could be that, just as the major parties traditionally seek Peters as a ‘kingmaker’, with his party as a complement that brings them across the line of a coalition, they also live in fear that he might withdraw his support. just that easily.
Would Ardern want to risk a collapsed government and early elections?
Ardern also benefits from the perception that the system as a whole is corrupt and in need of reform, which makes the reluctance to act specifically against Peters more tenable.
As the SFO investigates the NZ First Foundation, charges have been laid against four men for donations to the National Party. This means that two out of five parties in our Parliament are currently under investigation for fraud.
One of the four is Jami-Lee Ross, the rogue MP behind the complaint in what now appears to have been a spectacular self-imposed goal. More importantly for voters in 2020, it will be difficult for Bridges to plausibly claim that he has nothing to do with donations. He too is under pressure.
