Greens Must Reject ‘Tokenism' To Connect With Marginalised Communities

Scoop

21-05-2025

'People are right to be frustrated,' the co-leader tells Guyon Espiner. But she says 'tokenism' isn't the answer.
, Producer – 30′ with Guyon Espiner
Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick says her party must confront the uncomfortable reality that it continues to struggle with support from lower-income New Zealanders, despite advocating policies aimed squarely at economic and social justice.
In a wide-ranging interview on RNZ's 30 With Guyon Espiner, Swarbrick said the Greens were committed to engaging beyond their traditionally urban, affluent voter base, but acknowledged it was a 'big issue we have to crack open'.
'Lower-income people tend to not vote, and that is a really big issue,' she said. 'We haven't got there yet, but that's why we need to keep going.'
Swarbrick admitted the Greens have work to do to be more 'present' with marginalised New Zealanders, conceding the left has not always earned trust.
Swarbrick said building trust means 'actually listening to people and understanding what their issues are, and working with them to create solutions'.
'We need to have quite a lot of humility in building rapport with communities who do not engage with politics at all.
Identity politics – 'People are right to be frustrated'
Swarbrick also addressed claims both from political opponents and parts of the left that 'progressive' identity politics have contributed to a global backlash enabling the rise of right-leaning populist figures like Donald Trump.
Former Labour finance minister David Parker recently criticised the political left's 'obsession' with identity issues to the detriment of meaningful progress during his valedictory speech. In response, Swarbrick argued that representation initiatives and material outcomes for society are not mutually exclusive.
But she also noted the missteps of superficial diversity efforts that fail to shift power. 'Anything other than material redistribution is tokenism.'
'People are right to be frustrated,' she said. 'But some of these self-styled strongmen are punching down, scapegoating minority groups instead of confronting the systems that caused inequality in the first place.'
She pointed the finger instead at other political leaders inflaming culture wars. 'If we're going to talk about who's inviting this inflammatory culture war, it's the deputy prime minister deciding to bicker about what bathrooms people can use.'
Greens' Wealth Tax: 'We've shown people our hand'
Swarbrick also defended her party's proposed wealth tax, a 2.5 percent annual levy on net assets over $2 million, as a necessary structural change. She addressed criticism that such a tax could hurt asset-rich, income-poor homeowners.
When asked how the Greens could justify making a widow living on the pension in a family home pay an annual wealth tax of $25,000 or more, Swarbrick was unapologetic, noting the policy includes a deferral mechanism.
'If they don't have income at the time, the tax can accumulate against the property.'
'This is about the top 3 percent,' she said. 'It unlocks the resources necessary for all of us to live better lives.'
Swarbrick also backed a wealth transfer tax on large inheritances and gifts, framing it as a matter of fairness. 'That income hasn't been earned, it's been passed on. We all belong in this country and have a responsibility to support it.'
The tax platform is central to the Greens' alternative budget and is expected to be a key issue in the next election campaign.
'We've shown people our hand,' Swarbrick said. 'If we want to have the country that all of us ultimately deserve, we are going to radically need to turn this economy around.'
Would work with National – but only on Greens' terms
While stopping short of confirming openness to a National coalition, Swarbrick said the Greens could work with 'anyone' who supports meaningful action on climate and equity.
Pressed on whether the Greens would consider governing with National, Swarbrick replied: 'Sure. If the National Party were to completely U-turn on their callous, cruel cuts to climate, to science, to people's well-being.'
She noted some cross-party work on climate adaptation legislation but was critical of National's wider climate approach. 'Right now they are knowingly shredding climate action,' she said, referencing the party's emphasis on carbon capture technology.
Her comments hint towards a more pragmatic stance compared to previous Green leaders, though she made clear any cooperation would require a 'demonstrably different' National Party.
'The Green Party has always stood for both environmental and social justice,' she said. 'These were never separate issues.'