Labour’s win in Te Atatu ‘seals fate of Pasifika’ in new government

When Phil Twyford beat his National rival Angee Nicholas for the Te Atatu electorate seat in West Auckland on Friday, and by 131 votes, the Labour Party celebrated.

Te Atatu, typically a Labour stronghold, was one of two seats National lost after the special ballots were counted, lowering the party’s election night majority with ACT.

Nicholas was ahead by 30 votes and was National’s only Pacific hopeful before the special-vote count.

But the country’s dramatic swing to National has come at a cost for representatives from New Zealand’s Pacific population, academics, union and community leaders warned.

University of Canterbury’s Professor Steven Ratuva said with the special votes all counted up, the new government looks like it will not have a member of Pacific heritage among its ranks.

“The danger is that we may see Pacific issues swept under the table and out of sight of the political radar,” the head of Pacific Studies at UC told Stuff.

Twyford received 14,202 votes while Nicholas got 14,071, followed by the Greens’ Zooey Neumann (3516), ACT’s Simon Court (2506), Te Pati Māori’s John Tamihere (1261), and Independent Melanie Phillips (482).

National now has 48 seats, Labour 34, Green 15, ACT 11, NZ First 8, and Te Pāti Māori 6, with 123 seats in Parliament this term, after the Port Waikato by-election.

Ratuva said the election results do not look good for the Pacific communities, in terms of representation in the new National-ACT-New Zealand First Coalition government.

He said Labour’s win in Te Atatu has sealed the fate of Pasifika in the new government.

He said the swing to National was also part of the post-Jacinda Ardern tsunami development as Labour’s dominance receded.

“Voters in the middle swung towards National and those on the left, progressives and young voters, moved towards the Green Party and Te Pāti Māori.

“There was disenchantment with the Labour leadership right-ward movement to try and capture the middle ground, Tony Blair-style, and corporate loyalty (through its capital gains tax policy) but unfortunately, this alienated the left and progressives, who were more attracted towards the Greens and Te Pāti Māori wellbeing, pro-poor and people-based policies such as free dental care.

“The new government is probably going to be the most right-wing in the history of the country, with the ACT Party pushing for extreme measures such as the abolition of the Climate Commission and the Ministry of Pacific Peoples, amongst other election policies.”

Ratuva warned that if this trend continued, both the Greens and Te Pāti Māori parties could, in future elections, constitute a potential ruling coalition, “and this could spell disaster for Labour, unless Labour carries out some serious soul-searching and ideological reorientation”.

He said the election had reconfigured the national ideological divide “in an interesting way”, with the new coalition government shifting the continuum more to the right, the Greens-Maori combination constituting the left and Labour swirling around in the middle.

“ACT has the most right-wing political position and their plan to disband the Ministry of Pacific Peoples is an affront to the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion,” Ratuva said.

Other Pacific experts warned that such a stance had the potential to further marginalise and disempower minority communities in Aotearoa.

Community leader Pakilau Manase Lua told a post-election panel he was “shocked” that the safe Labour seats had “flipped” towards National and other parties.

“Concerns were raised, especially from the most vulnerable, particularly about cutting services and potential benefits to the under-represented communities.

“It’s going to be a tough three years for our people.”

E tū unionist Fala Haulangi criticised ACT’s move to abolish the Ministry of Pacific Peoples, saying it was “disrespectful” to Pacific people.

She also said she was concerned at National and ACT’s plan to target “sick leave” because this would impact “our workers who are the most vulnerable in the community”.

She said they would continue to campaign for an “extended” leave policy from the current five-day rule.

Economist Dr Filipo Katavake-McGrath said this election reminded him of 2008 where “society was up against a global financial crisis”.

“Incomes were dropping, people were homeless, there was no end in sight. And what people did was they voted for change. And we are seeing that now.

“We are facing a cost-of-living crisis. People have the inability to find sustainable housing, and there are social needs that people have.”

Katavake-McGrath, who is also director of the Mental Health and Well-being Commission, said there was some inflammatory campaigning “that has got us to this point too”.

“Will it be the same as in the early 2010s where there was a period of austerity because the campaigning has boiled down to the idea that the economy needs to have demand taken out of it?

“To take demand out of the economy is to take people’s incomes away by making them unemployed.

“The question is whether the right-wing parties have moved on and may look at taking demand out of the economy in a more nuanced way or will they revert to the old way that they have done this type of thing.”

In 2020, Labour won more than half of the votes cast, and a total of 65 seats, including the largest Pacific caucus. This year, that statistic has been reduced to 34 seats (26.91%).

Ratuva said there were different reasons why Labour lost their seats.

“Some Labour MPs probably took Pacific votes for granted based on the idea that Pacific voters will always vote for Pacific Labour MPs.

“Life is getting more difficult and complex and people are looking for alternatives which will address their wellbeing, human security and social advancement issues.

“The low turnout of Pacific voters would have impacted on the results. In Māngere itself, a Pacific-Labour stronghold, Labour votes were reduced by half compared to 2020.”

He said Pacific voters did not vote for Labour at all this year. “This should be a reason for a rethink.”