Vernon Small: The opportunity in Opportunity

Sunday, 19 July 2026

Vernon Small is a former Labour Government advisor and journalist.

OPINION: It was 33 years ago yesterday (July 18) that Winston Peters launched the NZ First Party.

Not only have he and his party become a fixture of the political landscape (where else in a democracy can you find a party leader who has lasted as long?) but he has so often determined who has ruled the country.

So, after more than three decades of NZ First’s influence, is it time for a new centre-ish kingmaker or queenmaker that can look, Janus-like, in two directions to neuter some of NZ First’s power over the shape of the next government?

It may not be a new idea, but it is key to the appeal of (the) Opportunity (party) despite its progressive and left-leaning policies. And it is becoming increasingly possible as the relaunched party edges towards the 5% threshold in recent polls.

Of course, there have been others who have tried the centre track but ultimately failed to permanently dislodge the 81-year-old warhorse from his seat on the fulcrum of power.

The strongest showing came from United, later United Future, which at the first MMP election in 1996 brought together a group of moderate National and Labour MPs including former Labour minister and Ohariu MP Peter Dunne (who from 1984 clocked up his own 33 years in Parliament).

Aside from a strong result in 2002, off the back of Dunne’s “commonsense” positioning, it limped rather than soared. At times it tried to bulk up its appeal by amalgamating with other small parties and factions, from hunting and fishing types to conservative Christians. But while Dunne survived, and was a minister for years under successive governments, the promise of it becoming the equivalent of Germany’s centrist “permanent party of Government”, the Free Democratic Party, was never really fulfilled.

Back to the future, there are a couple of major hurdles ahead of Opportunity’s ambition.

Firstly, for this election at least, NZ First is making it clear it is not looking both ways. Quite the opposite. It has rejected any suggestion it will do a deal with Labour and certainly not with the Greens and Te Pāti Māori (TPM).

Presumably that leaves it either cleaving to a re-elected National-led Government or at least not ousting National from office.

The second, and more significant, problem is a mathematical one.

On current polling, while there is the opportunity for Opportunity to displace TPM as Chris-maker, that’s about as far as it goes.

To provide an alternative on the Right it would not just have to breach the 5% threshold but also bring in enough votes to displace NZ First in a potential coalition. In other words, record not just 5%, but more than double that to bridge the gap between National plus ACT (around 38%) and a majority. If it fails to do that, what are the options on that side of the House? A four-headed coalition of National, NZ First, ACT and TOP?

It’s hard to see that as the dream scenario for anyone, least of all TOP’s “new politics” voters. And how that would go is everyone’s easy bet. Not well.

In any case, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has made his views on Opportunity clear. No dice. And Labour leader Chris Hipkins has warned strongly against voting for Opportunity, because its open stance means there is no certainty it would use its seats to unseat National.

As far as Labour is concerned, Opportunity’s potential success at the November 7 election is not a one-dimensional bet.

Yes, it could remove the need to dial Te Pāti Māori into government-formation. But TPM’s support to replace a National-led government is guaranteed so little would be gained from that once the votes are counted.

Certainly, Opportunity seems much more likely to back the Left than the Right – but again there are no guarantees of that.

And yes, its success would increase the odds of a centre-left government.

Which brings us to an intriguing hypothetical. Should Hipkins do a back-flip and signal to Mt Albert voters that they should elect Opportunity leader Qiulae Wong instead of Labour’s Helen White in the red ribbon seat that has been held by Labour leaders Helen Clark, Jacinda Ardern and David Shearer?

Given the margin between the two blocs is close (and perhaps non-existent when you factor in a possible Te Pāti Māori overhang seat or three) it would be a risky ploy, especially without a guarantee of support from Opportunity - a factor which sets the situation apart from National’s various nods and winks towards ACT in the Epsom seat, even if it was in Labour’s DNA to do such deals.

Opportunity’s existence, either by exceeding the threshold or from a “deal” in Mt Albert, would almost certainly rule out an alternative centre-Left majority, meaning Labour would have to deal with them. So not an option, but a certainty.

And finally, sending a signal to voters that Opportunity is a safe bet could boost support it wins across the country from those concerned at “wasting” their vote for a party that otherwise may not make the 5% threshold. Those voters would come disproportionately from Left, not National and even less NZ First.

On the other side of the ledger, an implied Labour “deal” with Opportunity could spook back into the fold National voters toying with a vote for Opportunity.

Lose-lose.

Over the next few months support for National would need to firm up significantly for Labour to spend political capital on that matrix of gambles.

What do you think? Email sundayletters@stuff.co.nz. Please include your full name and address.