The focus for the party must be on developing its own post-Cyclone Gabrielle reconstruction and resilience plan that it can promote positively and with confidence
Opinion: Christopher Luxon is not about to be rolled as leader of the National Party. Speculation to the contrary is malicious mischief-making or ill-informed, idle gossip.
The National Party may be many things and has clearly lost its mojo since the advent of Chris Hipkins. But it is not stupid. It has learned the bitter lessons of its failure in 2020, even if it has yet to fully apply them.
Historically, National has been the most aggressive and at times unscrupulous of our parties in the pursuit of power. Nothing has changed and, having failed so dismally in 2020 when it went through three leaders in election year, National is not about to repeat that performance this year.
Simon Bridges started the rot in 2020 by injudiciously timed social media comments regarding the Government's Covid-19 response. He was summarily and hurriedly dumped, even though by election time, the accuracy of his comments had become obvious.
Rather than panic again as it did in 2020, National will play the long game this time. Based on what happened in 2020, National knows that in overseeing the response to Cyclone Gabrielle, Labour will be utterly shameless in milking every drop of political advantage it can. Hipkins is more ruthless and cynical than Ardern in that regard. That could leave National floundering once more, starved of political oxygen, just as it was in 2020.
READ MORE:
* Christopher Luxon absent as Chris Hipkins steps into the floodlights
* Luxon’s success with ‘deadly serious’ plan to diversify
* Luxon’s grand plan to fix the National Party
But non-government parties trying to score political points in this environment is pointless and counter-productive, as Bridges discovered. Luxon is not going to repeat that mistake, which is why so far throughout the cyclone response he has been broadly supportive of the Government’s actions.
However, those who naively believe National should put politics aside and support the Government in this hour of need miss the point that politics is ultimately the contest of ideas. That contest spells out a contrast and offers voters a choice. If one side “loyally” supports the other in a time of crisis, there is ultimately no contest of ideas, and consequently no choice for voters.
At some point, therefore, National will need to respond with positions of its own. Then, it could either focus on picking holes on what it sees as the shortcomings in the Government’s response or set out its alternative approach. But being just the carping critic of whatever the government does in the wake of this massive natural disaster will quickly wear thin, no matter how justified the criticisms may be, or how inadequate the Government actions appear.
Luxon has managed to instil more discipline in what appeared previously to be a disorganised National caucus rabble. The problem, as the recent summer hibernation showed, is that it has become the discipline of silence
So, National now needs to position itself as the party of the constructive alternative, putting forward positive proposals for post-cyclone reconstruction, and the development of more long-term community and environmental resilience. There are signs in Luxon’s most recent comments he is seeking to move National into that space, but as yet there are no specific details of what National’s constructive alternative might look like. And, given the way National frittered away so many opportunities to seize the initiative over the pre-cyclone period of summer, and take early control of the election year political agenda, there are real doubts that it can step up to the challenge now.
But if any party should know what is required, immediately, and over the medium to long-term, it is National. After all, it was the government that had to deal with the last two natural disasters of a similar scale – the 2000/11 Christchurch and 2016 Kaikoura earthquakes. Of all parties it should know best what worked, and more importantly what did not, in those situations, as well as the governmental levers that need to be pulled, how, and when. National should be able to develop a relief strategy based on those experiences, which can then be tested alongside what the government is doing.
Natural disasters and the all-encompassing immediacy of a government’s response will always shut out the parties not in power from political and media attention. In 2020, National adopted the wrong strategy in response to Labour’s Covid-management plan. Its reaction was too aggressive, too critical, and too soon, and it probably contributed to National's defeat in that year’s election. A similar fate awaits National this year if it adopts the wrong strategy right now.
All of which is a further argument in favour of the constructive alternative approach. But the temptation to play politics and score cheap political points when the chances arise, especially against a government becoming so “in your face” as this one, remains strong. If National is going to become the party of the constructive alternative, it will need to adopt a high-ground, disciplined approach. The cheap shots can be left to ACT, already no slouch in that department, and often striking telling blows when it does so.
Since becoming leader, Luxon has managed to instil more discipline in what appeared previously to be a disorganised National caucus rabble. The problem, as the recent summer hibernation showed, is that it has become the discipline of silence, where now, Micawber-like, National stands quietly by, waiting for circumstances to fall its way.
The message to Luxon and National is clear. The focus from now must be on developing a constructive reconstruction and resilience plan which the party can promote positively and with confidence. Luxon and his team need to be unrelenting in promoting their alternative, while not eschewing working co-operatively with the Government when their paths coincide.
Every now and then, Luxon has shown brief flashes of being able to step up to a more statesmanlike role – his speech in response to President Zelensky’s address to Parliament, for example – but so far, that has been the exception, not the rule. The cyclone response is his opportunity to show New Zealanders he can provide and – more importantly – sustain the tone, policy and leadership now required. If he succeeds, he will likely be Prime Minister by year’s end. If not, National will indeed be looking for a new leader – but not before the election.
