Forget Copeland, new political party is Destiny's child
If anyone had ever wanted an example of why Christian parties find it so hard to make it into Parliament, you need look no further than the first splutterings of the latest "unified'' political vehicle.
No sooner had it coughed into life at a press conference in Auckland staged by the always-slick (and I'm not just talking about Brian Tamaki's hair) Destiny Church than Gordon Copeland, Parliament's resident gaffe-meister, went and poured sugar in the petrol tank.
Rather than welcome Destiny's Richard Lewis as his fellow co-leader, Copeland told journalists he wasn't sure whether Lewis was up to the task.
"Richard has the potential to be a good co-leader of a political party but it's not going to happen all that quickly,'' mused Copeland.
"I think I can live with that,'' he added. "But the reality is I've got five years of parliamentary experience so from my point of view quite a lot of mentoring will have to happen.''
Once journalists had picked themselves up off the floor, one recovered enough to ask why Copeland believed that he, who had made his share of groan-inducing errors in his time in Wellington, was a suitable mentor for any student of politics?
"What gaffes are you referring to?'' inquired Copeland, who seems at least to have developed a politician's habit of the convenient memory lapse.
Quite what Copeland's credentials to lead a political party are I'm not yet clear. He entered Parliament on the coat-tails of Peter Dunne then welshed on the voters who put him there as a representative of United Future, leaving the party ostensibly because it didn't oppose Sue Bradford's child discipline bill.
As an independent, Copeland has been threatening to start up his own political party, aided by other creatures of the party list without a snowball's chance of ever winning an electorate seat - Larry Baldock and Bernie Ogilvy.
But at some point reality must have dawned on Copeland's brigade that without the money and the membership muscle of the Destiny Church they were never going to get anywhere.
The immediate flaw in this Faustian deal with Destiny has become apparent: too many egos, not enough party. Copeland thinks he should be in charge because he's an MP; Destiny has the media management skills, thousands of supporters, and lots and lots of money.
In politics it's money that buys power, which is why Copeland's really a back-seat passenger, whether or not this has dawned on him yet. Peter Dunne himself knew that. Why else would he have hooked up his party, United, to Future NZ, a Christian organisation with money and supporters?
The holy grail for all Christians intent on forming their own political movement is the 5% threshold for seats in Parliament. They figure that given roughly half of all voters identify themselves as such, surely if one party could get its act together, getting into Parliament should be a shoo-in.
The reality is, as countless Christian parties have found out, not nearly that simple. For one thing, just because many voters are Christian doesn't mean they will vote for a Christian party. In fact, some loathe the idea. They want more Christians in Parliament, but not all in one party.
For another, the 5% threshold is higher than they think. It's 100,000 votes, give or take, unless a candidate can be found who is capable of winning an electorate. And running a disciplined political party is harder than it looks. Ask Christian Heritage. It split apart even before its leader Graham Capill ended up in jail on sex convictions.
Finally, assuming all Christians think alike or have the same political views is as idiotic as thinking all Maori will vote for the Maori Party or that only lower-income people vote Labour.
Often the competing interests and agendas in Christian parties seem to blow them apart, perhaps because they don't have the same ideological prism that members of Labour or National or the Greens or ACT can offer their membership.
That's not to say that it can't be done. The Christian Coalition came close in 1996, winning 4.3% of the vote. Destiny is very strong in South Auckland in particular, and if it can convince Phillip Field to stand for the new party in Mangere, it may be able to enter Parliament through the back door.
But there are many problems. Field may yet be charged with criminal acts. The presence of Bishop Brian Tamaki, even in the background, is likely to scare off as many voters as it attracts. Many voters haven't forgotten the march of the blackshirts on Parliament for the "enough is enough'' rally against civil unions. Add in the bumbling Copeland and you could have a recipe for disaster.
Destiny is claiming widespread support from more traditional churches for the new political party, but that's yet to be demonstrated. The Catholic and Presbyterian ministries have reacted with extreme caution. The Salvation Army today denied having anything to do with it.
And that's perhaps the biggest problem the new Christian party faces. Most of the mainstream churches maintain strictly apolitical stances, and many New Zealanders have long believed religion and politics shouldn't mix.
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
Gone by launch-time.
Probably a minor irritant for National, nothing more. John Key can't help himself though, seeing potential partners everywhere from the Greens to God. Even talking about a Nats-Nuts coalition will hurt him - "last cab off the rank" is the message he needs to send out, loud and clear. Labour would love to see them cuddle up close.
Copeland's personality and ability - reminds me of that guy in the UK in the 80s who was likened to "being savaged by a dead sheep".
Or this could perhaps just signal that he realises he has no show of getting back on his own and he likes the job.
But how a devout RC can put up with some heretical self-appointed "bishop" is beyond me.
"Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus" is still Vatican policy last time I checked.
I think it's exciting - When we say it's a Christian party, then let's see who's really in there for God. Things have to get better - with violence, poverty, teen suicide & pregnancy and increasing health issues, the current members have not done well at all. After all - we all want peace and happiness, don't we?
When I saw the news article about the new party's launch, it was a very welcome bit of humour.
Here is a "joint" party, yet Destiny was all one saw - maybe this was just the way it was reported. But then the interview with Copeland, who basically said "Co-Leadership? What do you mean **co**?"
I really cannot see this lasting, partly because of the way it has started, but also because Destiny's firebrand attitude has got to be too strong for more conventional Christian political groups. Destiny has such a strong base in intolerance that I cannot see them being bedfellows with anyone else - at least no-one they haven't been married to for several years first.
I'm a Christian, & this is all so embarrassing. Half the trouble with this "Christian coalition party" thing is that all the players think there is a single "Christian political" viewpoint. Excuse me please, but what is it? Almost everywhere in the world, the "party of God" turns out to be the least tolerant & helpful of any political group. They give their religion a bad name. Is that what we want for NZ?
As for the other half of the trouble: where's the credibility? Associate a Christian party with political buffoons like Copeland & Field, & how will the party get real respect from ordinary Kiwis? And please, Bishop Tamaki, since when did your ability at religion qualify you to get into politics?
I don't expect politics to deliver me the "Kingdom of God". Didn't Jesus say, "My Kingdom is not of this world"? But the way this lot go on, how would the ordinary Kiwi ever find that out? No wonder, Colin, you can't figure it all out. I'm not surprised if some of your readers think Christians are fruitcakes. I'd rather simply support decent policies & proven operators - stuff that's good for NZ. What's so hard about that? Why do we need these idiot boutique parties?
A new version of a 'Christian' party will provide an amusing but sad sideshow for the voters of Mangere, who after years of Labour MP representation and govt are still at the bottom of the heap and now considered easy prey for religious mixed nuts.
I presume the "Faustian deal with Destiny" is tongue in cheek or just a convenient expression?
If the new party (if they get in) was to make a deal with Labour then that would be Faustian.
This is just following the fine Christian tradition of schisms. Next thing, it will be the Arian heresy.
I just want to congratulate Roscoe on his post.
I am not a Christian, and well, quite frankly my beliefs are no-one's business. But irrespective of any religious references, the association of the Destiny political movement to the Destiny church means it loses all credibility, as do those who choose to associate with it politically.
Like you, Roscoe (from the sound of things), I get annoyed and frustrated with the Christian-bashing that goes on, just as much as the Muslim-bashing and, well all bashing really. It is most unfortunate that the radical elements in society get so much publicity, and give a bad name to the wider community to which they purport to belong.
I feel for the Christian parties - they have not had a lot of luck - what with Destiny's influence, Mr Capill, etc.
Just from a pure political viewpoint, the alliance is deeply troubled and I am amazed they even decided to try and make it work.
SPCA steps in on injured dog standoff
Daily trivia quiz: February 10
'Very white' Australian rugby cops criticism
Principal accused of sunburn bribe
Eva Longoria in porn Tweet mishap
Fantastic panoramic of Taranaki
Baby elephant a natural show-off
Plan to claw back $1.7b by axing depreciation tax breaks
SPCA steps in on injured dog standoff
Fifth of adults choose pets over partner
Stewart Island Maori v Pakeha rugby game
Outrage as Key signals national park mining
Key 'no GST rise' video emerges
SPCA steps in on injured dog standoff
Key confirms GST increase being considered
A pass for Key, but much more to do
King Kong ship meets watery grave
Sanzar and Sky decide it's time to titillate the fans
<I>Destiny is very strong in South Auckland in particular, and if it can convince Phillip Field to stand for the new party in Mangere, it may be able to enter Parliament through the back door.</I>
What "back door"? Our MMP system specifies two means of entering Parliament: win an electorate or exceed the 5% threshold. Neither is superior to another.
And looking at the above, you disapprove of candidates who win electorate seats, and you disapprove of candidates who don't ("creatures of the party list without a snowball’s chance of ever winning an electorate seat"). Which is it?