Analysis: National Party MPs are jetting back to Wellington to attend an urgent caucus meeting called by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon amid what he called “increased speculation about my leadership”.
Pressure has mounted on the Prime Minister over the past two weeks as he grappled with backlash against his criticism of Rotorua businesses, called comments by Winston Peters “racist” but decided to keep him as foreign minister and improvised a commitment during a talkback radio interview to hold a referendum on MMP if reelected.
At the same time, National has continued to struggle in the polls. Friday’s Taxpayers’ Union-Curia poll was a rare bright spot, showing National rising and Labour falling, amid a stubborn trend of National at or below 30 percent and just barely able to form a government.
Little has changed in that regard since April, when Luxon last faced down a prospective coup by calling a confidence vote in his own leadership. He won the vote, but the margin wasn’t released by the National Party.
It seems likely that a similar vote or other formal challenge will occur on Wednesday morning, as National MPs gather at Parliament during what was meant to be a recess week dedicated to campaign photo ops and electorate debates.
“It is clear from various media reports and conversations there is increased speculation about my leadership,” Luxon wrote on the social media website X on Tuesday afternoon.
“It is my firm belief that division and disunity are a major distraction only 90 days out from the election. I also believe this distraction is unfair to the New Zealand people, and dedicated National Party candidates, supporters and volunteers, when there is so much at stake. For these reasons, this issue needs to be resolved quickly, and I am calling an urgent in-person caucus meeting tomorrow at 9.30am in Wellington to resolve the issue.”
As the MPs file into their caucus room, many will have already made up their minds, having been undoubtedly subject to a barrage of texts and calls over the preceding 20 hours.
Here are the arguments they’ll have been hearing, for and against rolling their boss:
The pros
The big pro for around a quarter of MPs is naked self-interest. Recent polls show up to 25 percent of the caucus could lose their jobs. If Luxon’s personality and foot-in-mouth disease are depressing the party vote, then maybe someone else could keep them in the Koru lounge for another three years.
It’s not just backbenchers in trouble here, though many newbies who won red seats in Auckland in 2023 are facing the prospect of a return to the private job market. If National fares well enough in electorates, precious few – maybe even zero – list seats will be available. That would see senior MPs like deputy leader Nicola Willis (running list-only), Chris Bishop (in the battleground Hutt South seat), Gerry Brownlee (list-only) and Paul Goldsmith (in Act’s stronghold of Epsom) turfed out of Parliament.
This argument relies on the belief that National’s struggles in the polls are worsened – or at least not aided – by Luxon’s place at the top of the ticket. It is also premised on the assumption that someone else would do better.
There’s good reason to believe the former. For over a year, Luxon has polled behind Chris Hipkins in most preferred Prime Minister rankings. Hipkins, the Labour leader who lost the last election. Even at the height of Luxon’s popularity, barely a third of the country wanted him in the job. Compare that to Jacinda Ardern, who polled well above that until only the final year of her premiership.
As for the latter, well, we’ll come back to that. Suffice it to say that there’s currently no clear single successor to Luxon and relatively little data on how any of the potential candidates to replace him might fare.
Another argument in favour of rolling Luxon is that it would allow the party to rescind a key pledge damaging its chances of remaining on the Treasury benches: His decision to rule out working with the Opportunity Party.
The problem for National isn’t necessarily a three-way coalition from the parties in Opposition. That still seems less likely than the coalition retaining a majority. Instead, the Opportunity party poses a lethal risk to National’s hopes of governing. Three of the past six polls have the party above the critical 5 percent threshold. If Opportunity is in Parliament, the maths changes completely – it almost certainly holds the balance of power.
Luxon, however, ruled out working with Opportunity. The party above 5 percent means National out of power. If Opportunity continues its push above the 5 percent threshold in polls over the coming weeks, that will be an electoral death sentence for National.
A new leader, however, could rule the party back in. Suddenly, the path to power is clear again.
Rolling Luxon would also strip Labour of one of the planks of its own campaign strategy: Bashing the Prime Minister. Labour’s campaign chair Kieran McAnulty explicitly told reporters last week that the party wanted Luxon to stay in the role because it would boost Labour’s support.
“We don’t rate him. We think he’s hopeless, and if he’s in there, then we think that increases our chances of electoral success,” he said.
The final argument for a change at the top is that Luxon is now fatally weakened, regardless of what happens in the caucus meeting. Perhaps the worst-case scenario for the National Party is that its caucus emerges from sequestration having decided to retain him – with his credibility and authority obliterated. As for Luxon, so for the National Party.
Luxon has now faced down half a dozen episodes of leadership speculation making headlines and is preparing to formally address his caucus over it for the second time. For MPs to once again come to the brink of change before backing away would strain credulity. A leader who survives this second challenge would not be long for this world, politically speaking, and voters would know it.
The Prime Minister, this argument goes, has sealed his own fate by publicly calling a caucus meeting in this fashion.
The cons
On the other hand …
National is still polling in a position to be reelected. Five of the past six polls have the coalition holding onto a majority. If the party holds steady and can put the leadership talk behind it, it can maybe gain some more support as economic tailwinds start to pick up.
Plus, while Opportunity might pose a threat to the coalition’s reelection chances, Luxon’s decision to rule it out hasn’t fully filtered out to voters. Almost no polls have come out since that decision. In theory, the party should be starting to bleed support from right bloc voters who want National to remain in power – all the caucus needs is a little patience, this argument goes.
In other words, there is a light at the end of the political tunnel. Luxon hasn’t been given the time to fully see through his economic and political turnaround, but early signs are looking positive. The momentum is picking up. That Taxpayers’ Union-Curia poll is proof. Hold your nerve and there will be more like it.
Yes, this has been a rough first term. But Luxon has grappled with the first three-way coalition under MMP, had to coordinate between two minor party leaders with more experience than him and dealt with the unpredictability of Trump, from tariffs to war in the Middle East. Given all that, he has done well, his supporters say.
While critics say he’s failed to manage Winston Peters and David Seymour, it’s true that the Government is still standing 80-odd days out from the election. Widespread predictions it would collapse have come to nothing. And Luxon is now the world’s most experienced handler of the NZ First and Act Party leaders. Is the caucus really sure a replacement would fare better?
Perhaps the biggest argument for retaining Luxon, however, is that there’s no clarity on who his replacement might be. This isn’t like Todd Muller’s coup of Simon Bridges in 2020, or Andrew Little standing aside for Jacinda Ardern three years before that. While Luxon may or may not have the numbers in caucus, he almost certainly has more support than any single other MP.
Each of his prospective replacements comes with their own baggage. Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop has a background as a tobacco lobbyist that he’ll never be able to shake. Commentators have said Education Minister Erica Stanford is a micromanager, not a team player, and bristles at criticism. Nicola Willis, the deputy leader and finance minister, is arguably too closely linked to Luxon and even more responsible for the sluggish economic recovery.
This argument is, ironically, something like the argument Labour took to the 2023 election. Yes, the caucus may want change. But who it picks is important – and could backfire.
Of course, Labour lost the 2023 election.
