Comment: When he was elected as National’s leader in 2021, Christopher Luxon promised the country he was a problem solver who “gets things done”.
“I have built a career out of reversing the fortunes of under-performing companies and I’ll bring that real-world experience to this role,” he declared.
Five years on, the Prime Minister’s inability to reverse his own persistent underperformance seems likely to spark yet more speculation about his leadership, following what has almost certainly been his worst week in the job.
Already on the back foot after his apology for suggesting Kiwi businesses had a “parent-child mentality”, while also battling the fallout from his foreign minister (and coalition partner) Winston Peters’ racially charged comments towards Green MP Lawrence Xu-Nan, what should have been friendly territory for Luxon – a talkback slot on Newstalk ZB – became a scene of self-immolation.
The trouble came when a listener asked whether the country could have another referendum on the MMP electoral system “to stop this farce of 5 percent parties controlling the outcome of government”.
Had Luxon stuck to his first answer – that he was simply “open” to a referendum on the electoral system, as part of a broader vote on a four-year term – that may have been the end of the matter.
Instead, when Woodham pressed him on whether he would hold such a vote next year, he needlessly chose to remove any ambiguity: “Yeah I think I would, because I actually think … that is quite right to check in constitutionally and say, is this the system, New Zealand, you still want?”
Normally, it is the prime minister of the day who is called upon to rationalise the rhetorical flourishes of overly enthusiastic ministers and backbenchers who get out over their skis. Thursday afternoon saw the inverse, as National MPs scrambled to account for what appeared to be a policy they were hearing about for the first time via talkback radio.
The party’s campaign chair Simeon Brown said the remarks did not amount to a formal announcement, with Luxon merely “on radio giving a view”, but wouldn’t say whether National intended to hold a referendum on MMP if re-elected.
Conversely, Simon Watts suggested the Prime Minister had been “pretty clear” that such a vote would be held. That clarity eluded Mark Mitchell, who claimed Luxon’s remarks were “not relevant to this election” as the party was not campaigning on the policy – while simultaneously suggesting National would “look at” a referendum next term if it was returned to office.
Speaking to media after an infrastructure debate that evening, senior minister Chris Bishop described Luxon’s remarks as mere “musing around MMP”. Yet the Prime Minister doubled down after a public meeting in Auckland around the same time, telling Stuff a referendum would be party policy.
Clear as mud, then – and the second time in as many weeks he has botched a significant announcement, after the muddled way in which he ruled out working with the Opportunity Party following the election.
The MMP remarks were clear enough to serve as an affront to National’s coalition partners, particularly given the subsequent suggestion he didn’t need “some yahoo or numpty from some other party” around the Cabinet table (although he denied he was referring to either NZ First or Act).
Peters accused Luxon of “a power grab”, and suggested National’s leader could face repercussions for failing to keep his own caucus in the loop. David Seymour was less hostile but more patronising, telling the NZ Herald that the Prime Minister “may not have thought through what he’s saying there”.
Looking at the idea of a referendum in isolation, it is hard to see how Luxon hopes to succeed, particularly given he would need a majority in the House to pass the necessary legislation for a vote.
When John Key called for a referendum on MMP in the run-up to the 2008 election, it was from a position of strength, with his party sitting around 50 percent in the polls and able to point at dysfunction within the incumbent Labour-led coalition government in making the case for electoral reform; even then, he did not succeed in dethroning the incumbent system.
With Luxon’s National closer to 25 percent, and having spent large chunks of the last three years being overshadowed by Peters and Seymour, the Prime Minister’s position appears less about principle and more about his frustration at his flagging polling and inability to manage the coalition.
It’s also an issue unlikely to win many (if any) votes, instead serving as a distraction from key economic issues – not to mention further inflaming tensions within the coalition.
Thursday could have been a day of good headlines for National: Bishop announced the opening date for the City Rail Link (a project first backed by Key’s government) while Labour revealed it would scrap the Government’s flagship Investment Boost policy, opening another area of attack for Finance Minister Nicola Willis to pursue.
Instead, National’s ministers spent the day dealing with an unforced error from their leader that overshadowed their own work – hardly a good omen ahead of a campaign period that will be filled with numerous debates, events and interviews for Luxon to navigate.
Will the week’s proceedings be enough to put the Prime Minister’s job in jeopardy? It’s hard to know, given he survived a confidence vote in April despite similar flubs, which are by this point largely priced in.
But MPs will surely get their fair share of feedback from constituents during the parliamentary recess next week, while some will be mulling whether they risk the same fate as National’s Tim Costley – trailing Labour’s Sophie Handford according to one poll despite winning his seat by over 6000 votes in 2023.
In his time as Air NZ’s chief executive, Luxon showed a certain steeliness in cutting jobs and under-performing routes. Perhaps he would be proud if his caucus colleagues took inspiration from his own pledge to be “ruthlessly focused on outcomes”, by making a cut of their own.
