National’s party list is a big improvement on its previous one, although it's still not as diverse as Labour’s
Opinion: Though the last few months have confirmed the current Labour Cabinet is probably the least talented since the first Muldoon Cabinet of 1975, things may not be that much better if National leads the next government.
In that regard, the ordering of National's party list is significant. Like Labour's, National's has an eye to the future. But where Labour's focus looks to be on preparing the party for a coming term in opposition by safeguarding existing talent, National's emphasis seems to be more on bringing forward those who might play significant roles in a potential second term government from 2026.
READ MORE:
* National’s list starts to reflect Luxon’s wish for diversity
* The latest charts and data on Election 2023
* National, tell us how your plans add up
On the assumption National does lead the next government, it will likely be in coalition with Act. That would mean there would be 14 or 15 National Ministers in the Cabinet, alongside five or six from Act, with probably two or three ministers outside Cabinet from each coalition partner.
If he is true to his reactions to Labour ministers’ failings, Luxon can be expected to take a strong line should his second-tier ministers fail to perform
Based on both their performances over the past three years and their rankings on the party list, the first National names in a new Cabinet alongside Christopher Luxon and his deputy, Nicola Willis, will be Chris Bishop and Erica Stanford. They will likely be joined by Shane Reti, Matt Doocey, Simeon Brown, and former ministers Paul Goldsmith, Louise Upston, Mark Mitchell, and Todd McClay.
Former leader Judith Collins will be there too and, given her near exemplary performance since losing the leadership nearly two years ago, she should play a key stabilising role within the new ministry. List newcomer James Christmas has been touted as the next Attorney-General, likely to follow the precedent of Margaret Wilson and Stephen Joyce in going straight into Cabinet. Gerry Brownlee, another former minister, will probably become Parliament’s new Speaker.
While Luxon, Willis, Bishop, and Stanford should be strong players in such a line-up, there must be questions about second-tier performers such as Brown, Goldsmith, Mitchell, and McClay. Brown is energetic and has scored some hits, but he often comes across as too narrow and disingenuous. Goldsmith is still living down the multi-billion fiscal hole he failed to see in National’s 2020 election plans, when he was finance spokesperson. Mitchell is diligent on law-and-order issues but could be too hardline for many middle ground voters, and McClay looks to be lacking the energy of earlier years.
As has happened too often with the current Labour Cabinet, it has been lapses from ministers in the second tier that have damaged the Government’s reputation. If he is true to his reactions to Labour ministers’ failings, Luxon can be expected to take a strong line should his second-tier ministers fail to perform.
Unlike 2020, it is possible to discern from National’s list the shape of future National-led governments, should they occur, and survive beyond one term. Aside from the Woodhouse fiasco, National should feel satisfied with the outcome
The last three or four National places in a new Cabinet would likely be keenly contested between experienced backbenchers Andrew Bayly and Melissa Lee, alongside Penny Simmonds, Nicola Grigg, and Tama Potaka from National’s last intake and former Minister Scott Simpson. Bayly, Grigg, Simmonds and Potaka seem the most likely, with Lee and possibly Simpson set to be ministers outside Cabinet.
Beyond this group, current backbenchers Simon Watts and Joseph Mooney merit consideration, but they look likely to have to wait until the first reshuffle to gain further promotion. Another name to consider is Barbara Kuriger, who was National’s primary sector spokesperson until she was stood aside after revelations about her unwise interventions in a Court case involving her son. She is unlikely to be considered for a ministerial position, but could take on a whip’s role, or chair a major select committee.
These calculations offer some context for the seemingly strange and abrupt decision of Michael Woodhouse to withdraw from the list altogether, in effect ending his political career. He had been a successful mid-level minister in the previous National-led government, but given the rise of Bishop, Stanford, Reti, Doocey, and Brown he would have struggled to climb higher in the ranks. Nevertheless, his departure is bad news for National, leaving the party without a Parliamentary or potential ministerial voice in Dunedin.
National’s list also highlights some names for the future who could come into ministerial calculations during the coming term, should there be a National-led government. Most prominent of these is list-only candidate Nancy Lu, an accountant and a graduate of the prestigious Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, fluent in English, Mandarin, and Cantonese. She will be an important asset for National in strengthening its links to the Chinese and wider Asian communities. Her list placing guarantees her election to Parliament.
Other impressive newcomers will include farmer Suze Redmayne in the safe Rangitikei seat, businesswoman and company director Katie Nimon, who could well take Napier off Labour, and former journalist Catherine Wedd who has a strong chance of winning the marginal Tukituki seat. In any event, their high list places mean they will all become MPs regardless.
National’s 2020 list was strongly criticised as lacking imagination and being very one-dimensional. The current list is a substantial improvement on that, although still not as diverse as Labour’s. Unlike 2020, when National’s list seemed more about protecting as many of the caucus as possible from the likely onslaught of the then coming Labour landslide, the 2023 list is a much more careful balance. In part, this arises from the fact that having done so badly in 2020, National has more opportunities to promote new talent in 2023.
Unlike 2020, it is possible to discern from National’s list the shape of future National-led governments, should they occur, and survive beyond one term. Aside from the Woodhouse fiasco, National should feel satisfied with the outcome. Although it does not resolve all the party’s problems and still leaves unanswered questions about how some likely ministers will perform in government, it does paint a clearer picture of the make-up and focus of Luxon’s National Party.
But before any of this can come to pass, there is the small matter of the election. Encouraging polls notwithstanding, National still has much work to do.
