Just saw this in an article about Gareth Morgan possibly standing for Epsom,
Morgan indicated the party would sit on the cross benches and give their confidence to whichever party could take on the most of TOP’s policies.
So, nice and clear now. Nevermind the language on TOP’s website about not seeking ‘to be the government’ (notable is lack of the word ‘in’ in that statement). It’s almost certain that TOP would give Confidence and Supply to either Labour or National. No more pretending that ‘cross benches’ means not supporting a 4th National term. TOP would trade C & S for policy gains, and then most likely be bound into an agreement on that.
I’m not sure why political language in NZ is so imprecise. All that hooha about the Greens ‘working with’ National. Which meant they would work on policy, it didn’t mean ‘they would support National on C & S or go into a coalition with them’, but even after all these years some people are still confused about it.
And look at that clunky sentence that I now have to write out each time because ‘supporting National’ is apparently unclear too.
Fuck it, I’ll just blame Hooton, Farrar and co, and all the people who would rather have power than democracy and thus are happy to mess with the public and language for political gain.
But it does behoove us to make the effort to be explicit if we want to be understood, with even more onus on political parties to s p e l l i t o u t.