Newsletter

"Dismantling Chris Hipkins' Anti-Democratic Attack on Smaller Parties Under MMP" - 28 July 2025

The tail doesn't wag the dog - it IS the dog's conscience

Ivor Jones The Māori Green Ltn

28 Jul 2025 — 17 min read

Kia ora whānau!

The recent emergence of Chris Hipkins' critique of smaller parties under New Zealand's Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) electoral system represents a dangerous escalation in Labour's retreat from democratic principles<14>. Speaking on The Front Page podcast, Hipkins argued that smaller parties shouldn't "call the shots" under MMP, revealing a fundamental misunderstanding of proportional representation and a disturbing contempt for democratic diversity<35>. This essay exposes how Hipkins' position represents classic majoritarian supremacist thinking that particularly threatens Māori political representation and self-determination.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/why-hipkins-believes-smaller-parties-shouldnt-call-the-shots-under-mmp/U3KT3O6H4YYSWAOIQ7ZYCSE6VY/

Understanding MMP and Its Democratic Purpose

Mixed Member Proportional representation was introduced in New Zealand following the 1993 referendum, with overwhelming support from Māori voters who recognised it as a pathway to greater representation[<59>]. As Sandra Lee, the first Māori woman to win a general electorate seat, noted: "Our campaign catchcry back in the day in 1993, [for] Mana Motuhake and all of our candidates was: 'MMP stands for More Māori in Parliament', and its been proven to be so"<59>.

The system was designed to address the fundamental inequities of First Past the Post (FPP), where National won elections in 1978 and 1981 despite receiving fewer votes than Labour, and where Social Credit received 21% of the vote but only two seats[<39>]. Former Labour Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer described the FPP governments as "elected dictatorships" precisely because they lacked the checks and balances that coalition politics under MMP provides<39>.

Comparison of Māori representation in Parliament under different electoral systems versus their proportion of the population

The Fallacy of Hipkins' "Tail Wagging the Dog" Rhetoric

Hipkins' criticism employs the tired "tail wagging the dog" metaphor that has been weaponised against proportional representation since MMP's introduction. However, political scientists have debunked this characterisation as fundamentally misunderstanding how coalition politics operates. Professor Jennifer Curtin from Victoria University noted that "those using this metaphor are misusing it"[<42>], explaining that true "tail wagging the dog" occurs when minority parties impose their policies on larger partners, not when they exercise legitimate veto power in coalition negotiations.

The reality is that smaller parties under MMP provide essential checks on the worst excesses of majoritarian government[<71>]. When Hipkins complains about smaller parties having influence, he is essentially arguing for a return to the "elected dictatorship" model that New Zealanders explicitly rejected in 1993.

Hipkins' Democratic Deficit

Hipkins' position becomes particularly troubling when examined through the lens of Māori representation and rights. His complaints about smaller parties "calling the shots" directly target the very mechanism through which Te Pāti Māori has been able to advance indigenous rights and challenge systemic racism[<68>]. The party's current influence in holding the coalition government accountable on Treaty issues represents exactly the kind of diverse political participation that MMP was designed to enable.

The broader pattern reveals Hipkins' commitment to a political system where major parties can impose their will without meaningful constraint from alternative viewpoints[<13>]. This represents a fundamental rejection of the democratic principle that government should reflect the full spectrum of public opinion, not just the preferences of the largest single bloc.

Exposing the Colonial Logic Behind Major Party Supremacy

Hipkins' critique reveals a deeply colonial mindset that views legitimate indigenous political representation as an inconvenient obstacle to efficient governance. When he argues that smaller parties shouldn't "call the shots," he ignores the democratic mandate these parties receive from their voters and their constitutional role in a proportional system.

The historical context is crucial here. Under FPP, Māori representation was consistently below their population proportion, with "brown faces in parliament noticeable for their absence"[<59>]. MMP changed this dramatically, with Māori representation rising to 21% of parliament, finally reflecting their 17% share of the population[<61>].

Hipkins' position effectively argues for rolling back this democratic progress in favour of a system that prioritises the convenience of major party governance over genuine representational equity. This represents a form of democratic backsliding that should alarm anyone committed to political equality.

The Neoliberal Foundation of Anti-MMP Sentiment

The critique of MMP as allowing "tail wagging the dog" scenarios consistently emerges from neoliberal quarters uncomfortable with the collaborative, consensus-building approach that proportional representation encourages. Academic analysis shows that MMP was designed to constrain the "worst excesses" of executive power[<71>], but business interests and major party establishments prefer the streamlined decision-making that majoritarian systems provide.

Hipkins' alignment with this critique reveals Labour's ongoing capitulation to neoliberal governance models that prioritise efficiency over democracy, speed over consultation, and majoritarian will over minority rights. The party that once championed MMP as a democratic reform now views its democratic constraints as inconvenient obstacles to implementation of their agenda.

Line chart showing the declining share of votes received by minor parties in New Zealand elections under MMP

The Decline of Minor Parties and Democratic Diversity

Contrary to expectations, minor party representation has actually declined under MMP[<25>], with the combined vote share of non-major parties falling from 35% in 1996 to around 16% in 2023. This trend undermines Hipkins' argument that smaller parties wield disproportionate influence - if anything, the data suggests the opposite problem.

The decline reflects the major parties' successful adaptation to MMP, developing strategies to marginalise smaller competitors while maintaining the appearance of proportional representation. Research shows that "every minor party that has gone into government has subsequently received a worse party vote at the following election"[<25>], suggesting that coalition participation actually weakens rather than strengthens minor party influence.

Te Pāti Māori's Democratic Legitimacy Under Attack

Hipkins' critique takes on particular significance given Labour's exclusion of Te Pāti Māori from potential coalition arrangements<15>. While ostensibly based on policy differences, the pattern reveals a systematic attempt to delegitimise indigenous political representation that challenges Labour's paternalistic approach to Māori issues.

Te Pāti Māori's influence has been crucial in advancing Māori health equity, challenging systemic racism, and holding governments accountable to Treaty obligations[<69>]. Academic research demonstrates that the party's policy innovations, particularly around whānau-centred approaches and cultural governance frameworks, represent significant contributions to New Zealand's democratic development.

When Hipkins argues against smaller parties "calling the shots," he specifically targets this kind of indigenous political agency that refuses to be subsumed within major party structures controlled by Pākehā political elites.

The White Supremacist Logic of Majoritarian Democracy

At its core, Hipkins' position reflects a white supremacist understanding of democracy that equates legitimacy with numerical dominance rather than proportional representation. This thinking inherently privileges the political preferences of the dominant ethnic group while treating minority political organisation as illegitimate deviation from "normal" democratic practice.

The language of "tail wagging the dog" frames indigenous and other minority political representation as aberrant rather than integral to democratic health. It suggests that political power should naturally flow to the largest groups, with smaller parties grateful for whatever scraps of influence they might be granted rather than exercising legitimate democratic authority based on their electoral mandates.

This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of democratic theory that conflates majority rule with majoritarian supremacy. True democracy requires protection of minority interests and genuine power-sharing arrangements that reflect the full spectrum of public opinion.

Implications for Democratic Integrity

Hipkins' critique of MMP represents a dangerous precedent for democratic backsliding in New Zealand. By delegitimising the role of smaller parties in coalition governments, he opens the door to more fundamental attacks on proportional representation and the democratic gains it has enabled.

The international context makes this particularly concerning, as democracies worldwide face pressure from authoritarian movements that exploit majoritarian rhetoric to justify minority rule[<74>]. Hipkins' alignment with this discourse, even in its supposedly moderate form, contributes to the broader erosion of democratic norms.

For Māori specifically, the implications are stark. The progress in representation and political influence achieved under MMP could be reversed if major parties succeed in delegitimising coalition politics and returning to more majoritarian forms of government. This would represent not just a democratic setback but a direct assault on Māori political rights and self-determination.

Defending Democratic Diversity Against Major Party Supremacy

Chris Hipkins' attack on smaller parties under MMP represents more than tactical political positioning - it embodies a fundamental rejection of the democratic principles that New Zealanders endorsed when they chose proportional representation. His "tail wagging the dog" rhetoric masks a deeply anti-democratic agenda that would concentrate power in major party hands at the expense of genuine representational diversity.

The particular threat to Māori political representation cannot be ignored. Te Pāti Māori's influence under MMP has been crucial in advancing indigenous rights and challenging systemic racism. Attempts to delegitimise this influence represent a form of political colonisation that seeks to force Māori political aspirations back within Pākehā-controlled party structures.

The broader democratic stakes are equally significant. MMP's coalition requirements force major parties to engage with diverse viewpoints and build genuine consensus rather than imposing majoritarian will. Hipkins' critique of this process reveals Labour's retreat from collaborative democratic governance in favour of more authoritarian models of party rule.

As New Zealanders, we must recognise that the "inconvenience" of coalition politics is actually a feature, not a bug, of genuine democracy. The requirement that major parties negotiate with smaller ones and accommodate diverse perspectives produces better policy outcomes and more legitimate governance than the "elected dictatorship" model that Hipkins implicitly advocates.

The fight for democratic integrity requires defending the right of all communities - including Māori - to organise political representation that reflects their values and interests. Smaller parties don't "call the shots" under MMP - they exercise legitimate democratic authority based on their electoral mandates and contribute essential perspectives to governance that would otherwise be marginalised or ignored.

Hipkins' position ultimately reveals Labour's transformation from a party of democratic reform to one comfortable with majoritarian supremacy, provided they can be the ones wielding that supremacy. This represents a betrayal of the democratic principles that led to MMP's adoption and a dangerous precedent for further erosion of New Zealand's democratic institutions.

Noho ora ai, kia kaha ai

Readers who find value in this analysis and wish to support continued critique of colonial power structures are welcome to contribute a koha to HTDM: 03-1546-0415173-000. The MGL understands these are tough economic times for whānau, so please only contribute if you have the capacity and wish to do so.

Kia ora rā

https://www.nzherald.co.nz

"THE EMPTY TANK: How a White Supremacist Neoliberal Government Left Its Carers on the Side of the Road to Die" - 26 March 2026

“The Pātaka Beside the Strait” - 25 March 2026

"THE PĀTAKA IS ASH: How Nicola Willis and Christopher Luxon Poured Petrol on the Poor and Called It Relief" - 25 March 2026

"THE POISON PEN MINISTER: How Erica Stanford Weaponised the Taxpayer-Funded State Against Her Own Critics — and Why a Wounded Luxon May Be Letting Her Burn" - 25 March 2026