New Zealand First leader Winston Peters is defending the Government’s record and its approach to both domestic and international issues, as pressure mounts over coalition tensions, foreign policy decisions and controversial rhetoric from within its ranks.
Kicking off election year coverage in a sit-down interview with Te Ao with Moana, Peters pointed to cost of living concerns and economic recovery as key drivers behind his party’s rise in the polls, while maintaining that long term change would take more than a single term in government.
“We never said we could fix it in three years. We knew this would take three terms to turn around, and that’s why we are working to get realism and common sense back into New Zealand politics.” Peters told Maniapoto.
It comes as the coalition has been facing scrutiny over divisions, including a recent dispute between the Prime Minister’s office and Peters’ office over New Zealand’s response to escalating tensions involving the United States, Israel and Iran. Te Ao with Moana happened to be there as it was unfolding last week.
Coalition tensions spill into public view
The release of emails from Peters’ office, which revealed differences in how each approached New Zealand’s response to conflict in the Middle East, revealed early discussions about whether New Zealand should more explicitly support United States and Israeli positions, before a more measured public stance was settled on.
The fallout unfolded in real time.
Minutes after the interview with Te Ao with Moana ended, the Prime Minister and Peters met as the situation developed.
Media reports initially suggested the meeting had taken place in the Prime Minister’s office, before it was clarified that Luxon had come to see Peter’s in his office.
Peters later acknowledged a “process failure”, but downplayed the significance of the episode.
“There’s a population of New Zealand looking for recovery, looking for survival, looking to become a great country again. And of course you’re going to have stress and tension. But it doesn’t mean that this is not a stable government. It just means we are making sure the issues are out there for all New Zealanders to know about. It’s called open democracy.” Peters said.
New Zealand’s response to the ongoing conflict in Gaza and wider tensions involving Iran has drawn increasing scrutiny, both internationally and at home.
The Government has faced pressure to take a clearer stance on Israeli military actions, particularly from protest movements and human rights advocates, while also maintaining its long standing alignment with Western partners such as the United States.
Peters signalled a cautious approach, arguing that judgments on the legality of military actions should be left to international processes.
“What I’ve said is there will be international legal experts over time who will examine that and declare whether the parties are guilty or not. We were unqualified to make such a judgment at that time.”
However, there has been criticism that argues the Government has not applied that caution evenly, pointing to the speed with which Iran was condemned compared with the reluctance to directly criticise the United States or Israel.
Immigration rhetoric and political backlash
Back home in New Zealand, or as Peters vehemently argues it not to be called, Aotearoa, debate over immigration and economic pressure intensified in recent weeks following controversial remarks from New Zealand First minister and deputy leader Shane Jones.
Jones drew widespread criticism after warning of a “butter chicken tsunami” in response to elements of the proposed New Zealand India Free Trade Agreement, a comment that was labelled offensive and racially insensitive by opponents and community leaders.
The remarks were later described as unhelpful by the Prime Minister, though Jones maintained they were directed at policy settings rather than any specific community.
Peters defended the broader concern and rejected accusations of racism, suggesting Indians have a sense of humour.
“He’s talking about why do we need all these chefs. It includes a whole lot of occupations and causes us to ask why on earth do we need them. The reality is that’s what he was talking about.”
The exchange reflects an ongoing dynamic within the coalition, where New Zealand First’s sharper rhetoric contrasts with National’s more measured tone, particularly on issues of immigration and identity.
Campaigning while governing
Peters repeatedly returned to cost-of-living pressures, positioning New Zealand First as focused on “ordinary people” dealing with rising expenses and economic uncertainty.
“We’ve stayed tuned to the basic issues, cost of living, cost of energy, cost of electricity, and the failure to grow our economy in the way we once did,” he said.
At the same time, he pushed back on criticism that progress has been too slow during the current term.
Superannuation and equity questions
It is not an interview with Winston Peters without talking about superannuation, with Peters reaffirming his long-standing position on keeping the eligibility age at 65.
While he has long positioned himself as a defender of universal superannuation, he was challenged on whether the system fairly reflects disparities in life expectancy, particularly for Māori, who, on average, die younger than non-Māori.
Peters rejected calls for structural change, instead pointing to broader health factors.
“We cannot help Māori and so many people in this country if this tsunami of obesity carries on. We are living proof of it. Most of us are in our eighties and still working.”
He argued that long term health outcomes, rather than changes to superannuation settings, should be the focus. As with previous interviews on Te Ao with Moana, Peter’s referred to Ta Apirana Ngata as more credible than any current Māori experts.
The exchange highlights ongoing questions around equity within universal systems, and whether current settings adequately reflect different lived realities across communities.
Treaty debate continues
NZ First has regularly been in the media, or in some cases on social media, over what critics have described as populist rhetoric when it comes to debates around te reo Māori and Te Tiriti.
The party has pushed policies including the English Language Bill, proposals to reshape the use of te reo Māori across the public service, and, more recently, the review of Treaty of Waitangi references across legislation, all forming part of its coalition agreement.
Peters criticised what he described as an expansion of Treaty interpretations through the courts and public institutions, arguing that decision making should remain with Parliament.
“We want to get back to what it was meant to be, the law. Not this situation where judges decide they’ve got more authority than Parliament and make the law themselves.”
It comes as the Government progresses a wide-ranging review of Treaty clauses, with ministers signalling that references to Treaty principles across dozens of laws could be rewritten, narrowed or removed - as part of NZ First’s coalition deal.
The review has drawn sustained criticism from Māori leaders, legal experts and opposition parties, who argue the process risks weakening longstanding protections and undermining the relationship between Māori and the Crown.
Just last Friday, the Waitangi Tribunal has been asked to grant an urgent inquiry into the review and the National Iwi Chairs Forum has written to the government calling on them to halt the review immediately.
Their concerns include the process itself, the limited to none scope of engagement with iwi and hapū, and the speed at which the review is being advanced.
The debate has intensified in recent months, with critics warning the changes could have far-reaching implications across areas such as resource management, health and local government, where Treaty obligations currently guide decision making.
For Peters, the focus remains on resetting what he sees as the balance between Parliament and the courts.
And as NZ First moves to deliver on the coalition promises, the campaign for the next election is already well and truly taking shape.
