Peters’ Super headache

NZ First leader Winston Peters is trying to downplay the revelation that he has been receiving too much money in state superannuation, but the issue could have an impact on the outcome of the September 23 election.

Opinion polls have predicted that Peters will be the ‘‘kingmaker’’ after election day. But if voters decide that his seven years of pension overpayments are not the result of an innocent mix-up, that scenario becomes more complicated.

Peters says the situation is the result of a ‘‘screw-up’’ at the Ministry of Social Development. He found out last month that he had been overpaid, and has returned the money. He says the sum involved is ‘‘way way less’’ than the $18,000 reported by some media.

But political opponents spent much of yesterday trying to make capital out of this. ACT leader David Seymour was keen to put the boot in. Why, Seymour asked, did Peters not notice the overpayments when he has made a career out of representing superannuitants?

However, Peters’ superannuation entitlements are not necessarily straightforward. They have been dependent partly on the status of his de facto partner Jan Trotman – not just because they live together but because she also has a career and income.

So far, Peters has declined to discuss the details, declaring it to be a ‘‘personal and private’’ matter.

The trouble with that is that the public is acutely interested in the way that politicians benefit from public money – something which Metiria Turei learned to her cost. The storm which broke over her head when she confessed to gaming the benefit system a long time ago led to her resignation as Green Party co-leader, and a halving of her party’s support in the opinion polls.

This is the danger that Peters now faces, less than four weeks out from election day. If voters are kind and believe that his pension anomaly was an innocent mistake, he should be fine. If not, they might punish him at the ballot box, and that in turn could affect the election outcome overall.

Peters currently appears to hold the key to who will take power. But one thing we have learned during the runup to this election is that things can change rapidly in 2017, with uncommonly wild swings in public sentiment.

Turei’s downfall and the slump in the Greens’ support is only one case in point. Another is the rise of Labour after it swapped the dour Andrew Little for the personable Jacinda Ardern as leader. Meanwhile, Peter Dunne has thrown in the towel in the face of almost certain defeat in the Ohariu electorate, writing off his UnitedFuture party as a useful prop for the National Party.

As things stand now, according to opinion polls, National commands 44 per cent of the vote, and Labour and the Greens (linked by a memorandum of understanding) have 41 per cent. Peters and NZ First have been polling at around 10 per cent, the equivalent of about a dozen crucial seats on the cross benches which could determine the new government.

Any change in Peters’ support over this superannuation issue could benefit National or Labour, or both. This election is getting more interesting by the day.

The public is acutely interested in the way that politicians benefit from public money.