Respecting the Greens in 2026

When the Green Party first entered Parliament in 1999, many thought it was a joke of the political system. It would not last. No one would take them seriously and they were/are too childish to hold Cabinet portfolios.

Over the years, the Greens have evolved from wide-eyed idealists. They included hemp growing Nandor Tanczos and Keith Locke – son of human rights/peace activist Elsie Locke. The party was co-led led by Rod Donald and Jeanette Fitzsimons. I was just 18 when this happened, voting in my first election (for Labour). I got to know a number of people at University who would vote for the Greens on the grounds of no genetic engineering, disarm the Defence Force and no more coal mines anywhere. Whilst I appreciated their enthusiasm for a better world, I would go onto to find their idealism too much.

My position

On one hand I significantly disagree with the Greens on the policies that they promote and the maturity of their elected Members of Parliament. On the other, I do respect the uncompromising defence of their principles. In all of the years that they have been in Parliament, the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand have been steadfast in promoting a fairer, healthier society. They deserve credit for that.

I disagree with them, not because I think that they are delusional. The Green Party members that I have met are some of the most principled people I know. My disagreement with them is because their policies are not what I necessarily consider realistic.

Of maturity and civil war

One example is getting to know the late Keith Locke, son of activist Elsie Locke. Mr Locke was their foreign affairs and defence spokesperson in the early 2000s. That was at a time when the New Zealand Defence Force was undergoing significant changes. This included disbanding the air combat/strike component.

It was also when Zimbabwe was transitioning into the bloody dictatorship of Robert Gabriel Mugabe. Mr Locke was forefront in making sure that New Zealand’s opposition to Mugabe regime policies and the consequences for them were well known. I met Mr Locke at several meetings whilst volunteering with Amnesty International New Zealand. A.I.N.Z. and the Greens had much in common pushing back against the regime. I met other Green Party members around this time and appreciated their unity and drive to put this and other abuses on the political radar.

Sadly, at times their maturity has been questionable. When Metiria Turei admitted misusing a Ministry of Social Development benefit, the Greens fractured. Instead of backing their leader to do the right thing, the party had a civil war that almost killed their 2017 election campaign. M.P.’s rose and spoke out, leading to their removal from the Green Party candidate lists. This brief but destructive internal conflict cost them 6 seats. The loss of so many seats likely cost them a ministerial portfolio, when Labour Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern formed her Cabinet.

2026 and beyond

The principled stand of the Greens helps reduce to some extent the idea that they are an “establishment party. This is in contrast to the two big parties, New Zealand First and – increasingly – A.C.T. The establishment parties are those whose continued presence in Parliament is assured, but whose respective Caucuses are starting to become too comfortable in the Parliamentary precinct. A.C.T. and New Zealand First in particular present a stark contrast to the Greens. This comes through their contempt for regulatory process and increasingly combative styles.

This, combined with sensible policies will encourage the voting public to re-examine how they approach the Greens. The remaining 8 weeks before the election will show how much the Greens have learnt. It will expose how suited the M.P.’s that co-leaders Chloe Swarbrick and Marama Davidson bring to Parliament, are for high office.