��һ�ǿ�����

Chris Luxon looks to be on the cusp of one of the most challenging feats of people management in New Zealand’s political history.  

Polls show that to win the treasury benches, the National Leader will need to find enough common ground between his party, Act and New Zealand First to form a Government.  

But, unfortunately for Luxon, hammering out the details of a three-way governance arrangement will likely be the easy party.  

It’s what comes next which will test his metal: Dealing with Winston.    

��һ�ǿ�����talk ZB PLUS has spoken to multiple former members of the 2017-2020 Cabinet about their time working with Winson Peters and New Zealand First. 

Across numerous interviews, two words came up consistently, when describing working with the party in Government: “Erratic,” and “chaotic”.  

“It was impossible to rely on anything he [Winston] said towards the end of the term” one Minister during that period of the time said.  

“The reality is New Zealand First under Winston [is] erratic, not reliable and almost impossible to predict what they were going to say or do,” says another. 

Although the start of the coalition started out better than many may have expected, it didn’t take too long for things to take a turn for the chaotic.  

“He would back-flip on decisions he had made and had agreed to; you would think you’re coming to an agreement, but that would fall apart when it was time to make a decision,”  

One example was around the Three Strikes legislation. 

��һ�ǿ�����talk ZB’s been told there was a handshake dealt with Peters to progress the plan to repeal the Three Strikes law. 

But when the policy was taken back to New Zealand First’s caucus, the position was revised.  

This wasn’t an isolated example.  

Towards the end of the three-year term, Labour Ministers wanted to start reviewing New Zealand’s adoption laws.  

It’s understood New Zealand First simply told Labour: ‘We’re not doing any more social policy’. 

But there was method inside what a number of then-ministers called the madness. 

"Winston never wanted to be the one that said no,” one then-Minister said.  

Instead, he would “gum up the works” as much as possible when it came to policies New Zealand First did not want to progress.  

One Minister at the time told ZB Peters would deliberately make it hard to get meetings, in a bid to stall the process of work New Zealand First didn’t want to progress.  

And when a meeting was finally agreed, Peters would stall, go off on tangents and there would be little progress made on the issues.  

“You would think you’re coming to an agreement, but then it would all fall apart when it was time to make a decision.”’ 

As bad as it was for many Ministers during that relationship, there were two who got it the worst.  

"I didn't cop it the way Jacinda and Grant copped it," one then-minister said. 

Another agreed: "Ardern and Robertson in particular got it bad." 

The Cabinet decision to not proceed with a capital gains tax was perhaps the starkest public example of how bad things got at the top.  

For the most part, Ardern religiously stuck to the "what happens in Cabinet, stays in Cabinet" rule. 

But on the day she went against the advice of her own Tax Working Group and ruled out a CGT, she made clear her feelings, when she said she was unable to reach consensus around the Cabinet table.  

“By the end of the term,” one then-Minister says, “there was an enormous sense of frustration and exasperation.”   

All those spoken to by ZB agreed that Luxon will have his hands full with both Seymour and Peters around the Cabinet table.  

For a rookie MP -- the National leader is still in his first term as an MP – managing a Cabinet of his own ambitious Ministers, with a handful from Act, is one thing.  

But throw in Winston and a number completely unknown, untested New Zealand First MPs and it’s a whole other kettle of fish. 

"Luxon's got an ago," says one former Minister.

“Seymour’s got one hell of an ego -- he thinks he's God's gift. To throw in Winston as well... I don't know how [Luxon] will function." 

The Ministers spoken to ZB all did so on the condition of anonymity. 

But the one man who was more than happy to go on the record about his time in Cabinet with Winston Peters was Labour leader, and Prime Minister, Chris Hipkins. 

"Expect the unexpected”, he told a zoom townhall meeting this week when asked what his biggest lesson was, from Governing in coalition with New Zealand First. 

“They were certainly not particularly consistent over the time we were in Government and one of the great frustrations was the amount of time and energy that was put into progressing a whole lot of issues, only for New Zealand First to change its mind at the last minute – often for no particular, apparent reason,” Hipkins said.  

“Winston Peters has built his entire political career on opposing things – I don’t think he knows how to build things.” 

In response, Peters hit back saying it would not be lost on New Zealanders "the reason for both this inane muck-raking story and the comments from soon to be former minister on the working relationship between 2017-2020."

"Nearly a full three years after being in government, and now just one week before election day, these comments are all of a sudden being made about New Zealand First.'

"It seems strange that these comments were not made three years ago when those soon to be former ministers were sitting happily in government across the cabinet table."

"No one could possibly take any of these belated, politically motivated, negative comments from these soon to be former Ministers seriously."

Peters said it was interesting that there were a number of those same minister who worked with NZ First that gave the party, in writing, and have stated their appreciation for the successful working relationship together.

"Not only does it reek of flailing desperation from Labour, those negative comments made by those few soon to be former Ministers say more about them than they ever will about New Zealand First."

This story was updated on Monday morning (October 9) to reflect their response.