Yes, very possibly, according to the numbers in the Roy Morgan poll this week which shows that Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First could form a government if an election were held tomorrow.
They are rivals in a crowded political market-place and the contest between Labour and Greens for primacy on a particular area is not always chummy - the best way for a journalist to get a response from a Labour MP is to let them know you have talked to a Green one.
But three parties are co-existing in such a respectful way they will increasingly be perceived as an alternative to a Government whose record as a competent manager is being challenged weekly.
Even when they are not actually co-ordinating their attacks, they appear to be working together.
Mr Shearer, Dr Norman and Mr Peters have inflicted damage on the reputation of Prime Minister John Key through a combination of the Sky City, John Banks, Kim Dotcom and GCSB sagas.
Few people believe Mr Key is actually dishonest, but more people now believe he is too casual, too trusting of departments, too sloppy in his oversight and too forgetful.
Co-operation between Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First was reinforced yesterday at a union-organised jobs summit in Auckland where the three leaders launched an inquiry into manufacturing that a select committee denied them.
The symbolism of teaming up now, with the Government looking as weak as it does was powerful.
The manufacturing inquiry builds on the co-operation the three parties have already had this term over the sales of the Crafar farms, the "Keep Our Assets" coalition, and reform of monetary policy.
Times have changed since the 2005 election when Mr Peters refused to deal with Labour unless the Greens were kept out of government.
The Greens suspect that Mr Peters' ill-will of the past was caused by a conference speech by the late Rod Donald in 2005, when he called Mr Peters a snake oil merchant and associated NZ First policies with Hitler's.
Mr Peters went on to become a quite credible Foreign Minister, leaving the Greens humiliated for the third time to be left out of government by Labour.
Mr Peters may have residual resentment in the fact that Russel Norman supported the privileges committee censure of him in 2008 over his failure to declare that Owen Glenn paid his legal fees to the tune of $100,000. But it does not show. The Greens, like most in the Parliament, have some respect for Mr Peters achieving his comeback and there has barely been a harsh word between them all term.
Whatever else the poll does for creating perceptions of an alternative Government, at the very least the Roy Morgan poll should dampen the dormant hopes of the Cunliffe camp in Labour. With Mr Shearer looking like a viable Prime Minister, the rationale for a replacement disappears. To be really safe, he needs to take the party to at least 35% and it is already evident this week that he will take more of the TV spots from spokesmen for greater exposure.
One poll does not an alternative government make, but a TV3 poll tomorrow will be watched intently for a continuation of the trend.
Even if the numbers are not unequivocal for the Labour, Green,NZ First triumvirate, several polls in recent months have had the Maori Party or New Zealand First holdingthe balance of power.
Mr Peters will resist being too closely coupled with the left, as he did yesterday, with a suggestion that the co-operation over the inquiry might be extended to other areas.
But the fact is that he had a largely trusting relationship with Labour in government and the prospect of New Zealand First going with National for a third term seems slim.
Ultimately, that would depend on what deals National or Labour offer in the way of positions or policy concessions.
Before the first MMP government was formed in 1996, when New Zealand First settled on coalition with National and Mr Peters being treasurer, one of his negotiators tested the possibility of a power-sharing arrangement with Labour that would have made Mr Peters prime minister for part of the term of government. Labour refused and the rest is history. Mr Peters was aged 51 then; he is now 67, more experienced and more realistic.
Labour is assuming that he would like to reclaim foreign affairs, if the numbers allow it after the next election.
The House resumes on Tuesday after a two-week recess and Mr Key's first task will be to correct an earlier answer he gave about having had no briefing about the GCSB's role in the Dotcom raid until September 17.
That the issue is adding to the strain on the Government's credibility is not lost on his own supporters.
National Party pollster and commentator David Farrar, on his Kiwiblog this week, said the Roy Morgan poll was sober news for National and set out a series of steps needed to recover, including a commission of inquiry into the GCSB the opposition has been demanding, fixing the Christchurch schools debacle, and a better response to the child poverty campaign.
But the greater damage to Mr Key's credibility has been about his political ethics.
As a prospective prime minister in 2008, Mr Key set a new ethical standard when he said he would not work with Mr Peters, even foregoing government, because he [Mr Key] could not trust him. He held the position in 2011.
He slagged off Helen Clark for sticking by Peters through the political donation sagas.
But when Mr Key defended Act leader John Banks this year and refused to read a police report on donations that may have cast doubt on his trust of Banks it became clear that Mr Key's ethics were as impure as the next person's.
Having earlier taken the moral high ground, his fall has been harder. That also makes it harder to recover.
Audrey Young is The New Zealand Herald political editor.
