Supporters of New Zealand’s major political parties have put aside decades of ideological disagreement to announce that political satire remains a vital part of democracy, but only when it is directed at somebody else.

The historic agreement was reached during an emergency cross-party meeting held at a Palmerston North kindergarten, where representatives from National, Labour, the Greens, NZ First and ACT were seated around a tiny table and asked to practise sharing, listening and coping with mild criticism.

The exercise was abandoned after four minutes.

National supporters were reportedly the first to object, arguing that jokes about Christopher Luxon’s property portfolio were “a nasty personal attack” and not remotely comparable to the dozens of jokes they had recently shared about Labour being unable to organise a working group without first establishing another working group.

Luxon was seen clutching a collection of miniature houses while wearing a blue bib labelled “CEO of New Zealand”, repeatedly insisting the properties were only toys and therefore did not need to be declared.

A National spokesperson said the image was an unfair misrepresentation.

“Christopher would never sit at a table that small,” the spokesperson said. “There is nowhere to place a proper boardroom agenda, and the chairs do not appear to be tax deductible.”

Across the table, Labour supporters became increasingly distressed after Chris Hipkins was handed a 400-page colouring book titled Working Group.

Hipkins reportedly spent several minutes announcing a comprehensive plan to begin colouring, before establishing an independent advisory panel to determine which crayon should be selected first.

“We reject the suggestion that Labour is overly bureaucratic,” one supporter said, while distributing a 62-page consultation document about whether the red crayon was sufficiently inclusive of the orange crayon.

The Green Party delegation also lodged a formal complaint after Chlöe Swarbrick and Marama Davidson were depicted sharing one very small green chair.

Green supporters described the arrangement as “an obvious attempt to silence progressive voices”, despite the chair having been painted green, labelled “Green Party”, and positioned directly in the middle of the room.

A Herald staff member attempted to find another chair, but was told that purchasing one would contribute to consumerism, while building one would require cutting down a tree.

The two were later heard debating whether the chair should be redistributed, decolonised, composted or renamed as a community seating outcome.

NZ First leader Winston Peters refused to participate in the provided afternoon tea after discovering several of the food items had been introduced after 1993.

Peters examined a bowl of avocado dip with a magnifying glass before declaring it “woke paste” and demanding to know whether it had arrived in the country legally.

He later accepted a plain biscuit after being assured it had not been endorsed by the United Nations, the mainstream media, or anybody under the age of 45.

NZ First supporters praised Peters for standing firm against modern snacks.

“This country used to be built on sausage rolls, tea and things you could pronounce,” one supporter said. “Now they expect us to eat hummus without even holding a referendum.”

Meanwhile, ACT leader David Seymour was accused of attempting to privatise the classroom’s crayon supply.

Witnesses said Seymour gathered every crayon into his arms, presented the other children with a contract and announced that competition would improve access to colouring.

Under the proposed system, each child would receive one free grey crayon, while access to premium colours would be available through a subscription service.

“Why should taxpayers be forced to subsidise crayons for children who refuse to create commercially viable artwork?” Seymour reportedly asked.

The plan collapsed when nobody could afford the blue crayon and Seymour accidentally sold the table to himself.

ACT supporters defended the proposal, arguing that the crayons had previously been controlled by an inefficient public container labelled “Taxpayer Dollars”.

The political daycare session ended in chaos after every party discovered that the Herald had mocked all five of them in the same image.

Supporters immediately accused the publication of bias, although none could agree which direction the bias was pointing.

National supporters said the article was left-wing propaganda. Green supporters called it reactionary. Labour supporters requested another meeting. ACT supporters asked whether the Herald could be sold. NZ First supporters demanded to know who owned it and whether they had arrived after 1993.

The Palmerston North Herald has since apologised for the confusion and confirmed that it does not favour any political party.

“We believe every party deserves to be mocked according to its unique abilities,” a Herald spokesperson said.

“National can be mocked for running the country like a property management company. Labour can be mocked for responding to a crisis by scheduling a workshop. The Greens can be mocked for turning a chair into a moral emergency. NZ First can be mocked for treating the present day as a temporary administrative error. ACT can be mocked for trying to invoice everyone for the crayons.”

The spokesperson added that readers were welcome to continue enjoying satire about their political opponents while becoming deeply offended the moment the joke moved one seat around the table.

“At the end of the day, political satire should bring people together,” they said.

“And nothing brings New Zealanders together quite like agreeing that everybody else is too sensitive.”