Caucus

The naughty prefect and the 'single source of truth'

Caucus

Show Notes

Greens leader James Shaw has been under the cosh for his Green School decision, but what's going on behind the scenes and will it cost votes? Social media rears it's sulky head, vaccination lies and debate over 'the single source of truth'. Plus, is Winston Peters in cabinet or not?

By Tim Watkin It's a rule of the playground, probably even at a Green School. Naughty kids can get away with things good kids can't because, well, people don't expect anything else. They can smoke behind the bike-sheds and just get a glare and a warning. But if the school prefect is caught doing the same thing, there's hell to pay. Expectations and reputations matter, at school and in politics. As James Shaw is being reminded this week. In this scenario, laid out by Guyon Espiner on today's Caucus election podcast, the ever-suited Shaw is the prefect. The good kid who never makes a fuss and sets an example. That's long been key to the Green Party brand - that they don't get down and dirty like those other kids. Kids like, well, Winston Peters, for example. Shaw has made Peters a focus of his criticism this year, arguing that the New Zealand First leader has played fast and loose with the government agenda, been an agent of "chaos" in cabinet and seemed to support policies only to u-turn after months of work. Peters, says Shaw, is the school bully and wants rid of him next term. But that casting was turned on its head this week with news Shaw had not only backed $11.7m of government funding for the Green School, a private school in Taranaki, but told his coalition partners wouldn't sign off on $600m in other infrastructure funding unless the Green School was on the list. As Espiner says, it's not entirely fair on Shaw. He's usually the halo pupil, but the one time he goes off for that metaphorical smoke behind the bike-shed, he gets caught and hauled over the coals. He gets damned as a pork-barreler for insisting on $11.7m for a private school, while Peters commits $72.5m to the racing industry with far less criticism, 'because that's just Winston'. Indeed, this week Peters has broken with collective cabinet responsibility to damn his own government's response to Covid-19. Having claimed credit for New Zealand's initial success, yesterday Peters said Labour was responsible for the government's recent failings, despite the fact he sat around the cabinet table, took part in the decision-making and has been no less than Deputy Prime Minister throughout. As Espiner and Scott Campbell point out, past ministers have resigned before criticising cabinet decisions. Yet Peters hasn't been called out. So when exactly is a government minister, not a government minister?… Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

More from Caucus

Oct 22, 2026

Are the polls starting to move? Has Christopher Luxon painted himself into a corner or does he still have an opportunity with Opportunity? Who picks up the phone to whom on November 8? And win or lose, who's left from National's front bench? Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Oct 15, 2026

The debates this week told us a heap about the state of the nation and the vibe of the campaign. We discuss how Opportunity took its chance, why New Zealand First feels boxed in, and where National and Labour are getting it wrong... and what they're doing right. ANALYSIS By Tim Watkin The Election 2026 campaign so far has failed to catch fire. It’s been a series of promises failing to capture the moment. A flurry of hand grenades that have failed to detonate. An October with no surprise. A trail with no destination. But maybe there’s a reason to celebrate all the same. On this week’s Caucus podcast, RNZ’s deputy political editor Craig McCulloch said he was relieved he wasn’t in the studio for the NZ Herald Leaders’ Debate because he “might have lost the will to live”. The rehearsed attacks, recycled arguments, and lack of vision arguably sums up the “rinse and repeat” campaign we’ve seen so far. “Primarily it’s the curse of the economic and global climate. But it’s also a curse of leadership.” Watching Chris Hipkins and Christopher Luxon debate the state of the nation, it’s hard not to see two men who lack the political imagination to move the dial. The commentary on their two debates thus far has been pretty scathing. But, as the Caucus team discuss in this week’s episode, there’s another way to look at these two major party leaders, stuck on 20% approval ratings and leading parties with a combined vote of 56-58 percent, the lowest in the MMP era. Uninspiring, sure. Losing ground to the other parties, undoubtedly. But how about – responsible? Take a step back and view this election from, say, 2050, and you might have a very different take on these supposedly boring, stale parties sitting in the centre of our political spectrum. Maybe the 2050 voter might be grateful to those who took on the thankless task of holding the centre during this turbulent time in politics. This is by no means an endorsement of them or a dismissal of the minor parties as radical or extreme. But there’s no doubt we are living in polarising times when democratic norms are fracturing. There are some good reasons for that, including the failure of mainstream parties like National and Labour failing to deliver on their promises. And there are some nutty and conspiratorial reasons… Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Oct 8, 2026

Major parties try new policies to reconnect with their bases, National re-writes its risk pitch, fiscal frustrations, & what stuck from the first leaders debate. ANALYSIS By Tim Watkin What’s a right-leaning voter to do? The past few weeks have seen debates about strategic voting as polls have consistently placed National below 30 percent and a centre-left bloc, Opportunity permitting, more likely to form a government. It means voters wanting to give the existing coalition the best chance of remaining in power are wracking their brains on where to cast their ballot. Stick, twist, or return? And, in turn, that means the strategists in National, New Zealand First, and ACT, are trying to figure out not just how to win the “soft centre” but how to steal from each other. [wk_audio]a6dfa00f-eb36-49ba-8f7d-02a109828beb As deputy political editor Craig McCulloch says in this week’s Caucus episode, National wants to be fishing for voters who will add to the overall centre-right bloc, especially the undecideds (approximately 11% in the TVNZ-Verian poll and 6% in the RNZ-Reid Research poll) and those who are dallying with Opportunity. They are the most useful and consequential votes to be won. But with Labour polling as badly as National and New Zealand First and ACT both polling well by their own standards, the party in blue is in a bind. The soft centre will be hard to crack. And at 25.9 percent in the RNZ poll, National is nearing its humiliating 2020 result of 25.6 percent, just without the leadership changes and pandemic. So, does it behave like a leader of the pack or does it grab the nearest life-raft and go after traditional National voters who have drifted – or strategically shifted – to its coalition partners? ACT, for example, is on nine percent in both the TVNZ and RNZ polls. For a party that got 0.5 percent in 2017 and had its best-ever result of 8.6 percent in 2023, it’s a strong number. But eight weeks out from the last election ACT was on 12 percent. National won back roughly three percent from ACT late in that campaign and has to be wondering how it can do that again. And can it also go after Team Winston? Its medicines policy, released this week, did just that. It boldly stomped into ACT and New Zealand First territory. Or as Political Editor Jo Moir says in the podcast, “National is, in an election campaign, trying to pull back the narrative”… Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Oct 1, 2026

The campaigns are launching and it's time to lock into politics New Zealand. Caucus returns to set the scene for Election 2026, discussing why incumbency sucks, strategic voting is controversial, and the minor parties are major players. ANALYSIS By Tim Watkin Polls leading into the campaign proper, which kicked off this week with Parliament rising and the two major parties holding their campaign launches, have been filled with headlines about “kingmakers”. Initially, New Zealand First was given the title, as it has been so many times before. But more recently polls have showed the new kid, Opportunity, holding the balance of power. But if we take the parties at face value, “kingmaker” is a word that no longer makes sense in 2026. The fluidity of previous election campaigns, when parties would often refuse to say who they might work with until the people had spoken, has been replaced with coalition calcification. New Zealand First has ruled out a coalition with Labour and Labour has ruled out a coalition with New Zealand First. And they’ve done it with vehemence. Winston Peters has posted his party “won’t do a deal with Labour” because “the left are full of woke self-confessed communists”, while Chris Hipkins has said Labour won’t work with New Zealand First because of its “overt racism”. Clearly, there’s no way back into government for Peters and co without National. The question is whether that changes the way they campaign. As for Opportunity, they are pitching themselves as “kingmakers” and say they’re happy to work with National or Labour. They’ll talk to the biggest party first, if they make it into parliament after November 7. But the current ‘king’ – Prime Minister Christopher Luxon – isn’t having a bar of it. In July he called them a party with an extreme tax policy. “We don’t want to work with them… they’re as centrist as I am an All Black”. And in case that left any doubt, he has said since “A vote for the Opportunity Party is a vote to put Chris Hipkins, Te Pati Māori, and the Greens into government… we were right to rule them out”. So, at face value, we don’t have any kingmakers in 2026. The lines have been drawn. Everyone has chosen a side. For the first time under MMP we have two blocs – the current coalition or some combination of Labour, the Greens, Opportunity, and Te Pati Māori. Is this then the most transparent election in MMP history in terms of knowing the shape of the next government? Except… In the Caucus podcast, which began its run through the 2026 election campaign today, RNZ Political Editor Jo Moir says Luxon’s line is “just nonsense”… Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Oct 20, 2023

A mood for change swept National & friends into power, so this season's final Caucus breaks down the numbers, unpacks the swing in Auckland, & looks at the coalition niceties. And the team opens their envelopes to check their predictions. Election 2023 By Tim Watkin Watch the video version of the episode here Analysis - Election 2023 is done but certainly not dusted. Our 54th parliament has been chosen and National will lead a coalition government into the new term. But what has the result told us about the state of New Zealand's politics and the strengths and weaknesses of our political parties? The Caucus team meets for one last time for this election to make sense of last weekend's results. What really happened in Auckland as it swung blue? Why is Labour on the verge of losing some bastion seats? And just who is Dan Rosewarne anyway? Julian Wilcox, Tim Watkin, Guyon Espiner and Lisa Owen talk through the big trends of the 2023 elections and what they teach us. They discuss the impact of Covid and where Labour went wrong. How much responsibility lies at Jacinda Ardern's feet and can Chris Hipkins survive this shellacking? They also look at National's rise and how it pales in comparison to Labour's fall. How will Christopher Luxon the Chief Executive handle the move to Christopher Luxon, Prime Minister and where does New Zealand First fit in? Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

See all episodes →