Australian Wool Board

The battle for NZ’s farming heartland: Groundswell, ACT and the changing face of rural politics

Retrieved on: 
Tuesday, October 3, 2023
ACT, Uncertainty, Pressure, Federated Farmers, Carbon footprint, Culture, Politics, Farmer, Leadership, New Zealanders, Tax, Human, Research, Livestock, Supermarket, Carbon, The National Party, MMP, Government, Milk, Treaty, MP, Trust, Population, National Party, Water, Methane, Australian Wool Board, Wine, Farm, Agriculture, Renewable energy, Animal husbandry, Internet service provider, Arms industry, Labour, Groundswell

For the first time in more than a century, farmers are not all in the same political paddock.

Key Points: 
  • For the first time in more than a century, farmers are not all in the same political paddock.
  • Farming has long defied gravity as an electoral force in New Zealand.
  • Despite comprising less than 5% of the population, farmers have achieved an extraordinary level of political power.

The end of farmer power

    • Under the old “first past the post” voting system, rural electorates held significant power due to left-leaning votes being concentrated in urban electorates.
    • This meant the farming vote in key marginal rural seats could swing elections in favour of the National Party.
    • No other country has seen such access to power granted to farmers.


    Read more:
    After the election, Christopher Luxon’s real test could come from his right – not the left

The old alliance crumbles

    • The rising environmental challenge in farming has three times been met by classic old alliance strategies.
    • In 2003, the alliance mounted the so-called “fart tax” protests to denounce investment in research identifying methane from livestock as a major greenhouse gas problem.
    • This time, the alliance had new elements – being required to sit alongside leading Māori land users who were emerging from the Treaty of Waitangi settlement process.

Groundswell and political realignment

    • For people focused specifically on the urgent need to develop new policy frameworks, Groundswell can seem confusing.
    • Read more:
      The Groundswell protest claimed regulation and taxes are unfair to farmers – the economic numbers tell a different story

      But the key difference is Groundswell’s style of political engagement.

    • It wants to radically break with the old political and institutional relationships it believes have betrayed the interests of grassroots farmers.
    • Other key actors in He Waka Eke Noa began to withdraw, either under pressure from Groundswell or (like Andrew Hoggard) to pursue a more radical political path.

Change and consequences

    • But there are still important consequences of a more radical style of politics taking root among some farmers.
    • Any diminishing of those old alliance relationships will reduce the political reach of farmers.
    • It was still the best mechanism for meaningful change in the sector.
    • Those chafing at change might imagine they are trying to preserve an older world in which farmers were revered and privileged.