Kiwiblog

Oh how nice. Auckland University is going to make Helen Clark a Doctor of Laws.

To be truly appropriate, I think they should make it a retrospective degree!

The Herald reports that H2, Heather Simpson, is also off to New York – on a short term basis initially.

This is a smart move by Clark. The UN bureaucracy is notoriously unresponsive, and Simpson is a very accomplished chief of staff. Probably fair to say she was more feared than loved in the Beehive, but a dose of fear into the UN bureaucracy is just what it needs!

The Herald reports that before working for Clark, Simpson was an economic lecturer at Otago University. Indeed, she was – she taught me first year economics.

Helen Clark resigned as a Member of Parliament on Friday, and flew out to New York late last night.

Audrey Young blogs Haere ra. She notes it is a dignified exit:

If you think back to how recent Prime Ministers have departed, there is virtually no comparison: an embittered Rob Muldoon stayed and wrecked Jim McLay’s leadership of National; David Lange stayed in Parliament for another seven years, not undermining his successors, but not happy; Mike Moore’s presence on the backbench for three years was a monkey on Clark’s back; and Jenny Shipley made the awful transition from Prime Minister to Leader of the Opposition, which just didn’t work.

Jim Bolger managed his exit once the numbers were against him but negotiating your own appointment as US ambassador – competent as he was – was a tad undignified. Better though than staying on.

Palmer did bail out gracefully. He resigned as Pm a few weeks before the 1990 election and retired from Parliament also. Muldoon and Lange were both sad figures who stayed on too long.

Audrey also refers to my list of strengths and weaknesses, and says:

Achieving and maintaining unity was the most important, in my view, because all other achievements flowed from that, but how long the unity lasts after her departure remains to be seen. It won’t revert to anything like the bad old days.

I agree – unity is hugely important. And while Goff will face some challenges if the polls don’t improve, they won’t be factional driven challenges, more ambitious wannabe leaders.

But Clark’s departure today and Cullen’s in a couple of weeks will mean Labour can start the rows they are destined to have over the past, the future policy direction, and how to rebuild, though they will probably be delayed until after the Mt Albert by-election.

How Goff manages the debate will be a crucial test of his leadership.

Well at least with Helen going, Phil should now be able to make at least second place in the Preferred PM stakes!

Now that her valedictory speech is done and dusted, I thought it was timely to do my own review of Clark’s years at the top. This is not going to be based on whether or not I agreed with her policies, but on how successful she was at advancing her agenda, and managing Government etc.

Achievements/Strengths

• Winning three elections. At the end of the day, this is what it is about and the only PMs who won more elections were Holyoake (4) and Seddon (5). Clark is also the only Labour Prime Minister to have won three elections – Savage and Fraser only won two each, Nash one, Kirk one and Lange two.
• Staying in office for nine years. Linked to the above, but as Jim Bolger found out, winning office and retaining office are not the same thing. Clark’s 8 years and 350 days is the 5th longest of our 38 PMs.
• Uniting the Labour Party. Labour was bitterly divided up until around 1996. This had been the situation since around the 1970s. Kirk was paranoid and divisive. Rowling kept fighting off the fish and chips brigade. Lange wasn’t in charge of his own Government and the Moore/Clark hatred was legendary. But Moore made up in 1996, was bundled off to the WTO and Labour has been basically unified ever since. Yes there are still  some very loose right/left factions but they are a shadow of their former selves and more social than political.
• Total dominance of the party. Clark gained dominance not only over the parliamentary wing, but also the organisational wing. Total loyalty.
• Master of all portfolios. Clark was no hands off Chair of the Board. She was involved in portfolios whenever they posed a danger to the Government. Her competence was rarely challenged (her judgement being another issue)
• Attracted good staff. Heather Simpson may have been feared, but that is what Clark wanted. Simpson was an extraordinarily effective operator, and Clark attracted some very smart operators such as Timms and Robertson. Good staff make a world of difference.
• Changed the political balance. She moved the political pendulum seriously to the left, and has ensured successor Governments can not move it very far back. Sure she never reversed the benefit cuts, but nine years of her Government locked in many left wing gains.
• Initially showed a commendable willingness to replace Ministers who were either not performing or had ethical lapses. This did not last, and will be dealt with later under weaknesses. But she started well.
• Smartly associated herself with nation building activities such as arts, culture, veterans, tomb of unknown solider
• Used Cullen smartly so that most of the time she was working almost as a President – foreign affairs, big ticket stuff, nation building, and Cullen ran the day to day mechanics of Government sorting out issues such as Foreshore & Seabed.
• Smart manipulator of the media – her coverage in her first term especially was almost hagiographic as she would ring selected journos and gossip with them. No way did they want to lose the inside edge. Very smart (from her point of view).
• In first two terms, showed pragmatic streak when needed. Backed down on certain employment law changes in 2000 facing Winter of Discontent. Dropped Closing the Gaps. Now in reality the work streams re-engaged at a later date, but from a political management point of view that is superb – you appear to back down even if you only delay or retitle. Remember this is judging Clark on achieving what she thought was best for NZ.
• Very sound on international affairs. Never seriously put a foot wrong. Dragged Labour to the mainstream on trade issues
• The FTA with China a massive achievement, and also getting the US to the table on one involving them.
• Managed good relationships with world leaders, despite differences – good with Howard and even Bush. Very close to Blair and Brown.

Failures/Weaknesses

• Never quite got the vision thing. The closest she came was her speech about how NZ should aspire to be the first carbon neutral country on Earth. People will vote for leadership and vision, even if it is not one they 100% agree with – Howard got re-elected despite majority opposition to Iraq War, because people respected him for doing what he believed was right. The one time she did get visionary, she never backed it up with substance – her record on carbon emissions being one of the worst in the world.
• A certain meanness of spirit. Her description of Don Brash as cancerous and corrosive. Her “haters and wreckers” description of foreshore and seabed protesters. I could go on.
• Loyalty above talent. Clark kept Tizard as a Minister for nine years. Even Hawkins lasted for six years. Samuels was twice made a Minister. While talented MPs such as Tim Barnett and Charles Chauvel were kept out.
• Over time she confused criticism of her Government and her, with criticism of New Zealand. Not the only PM to do this.
• A near total inability to say sorry and apologise.
• The culture of Helengrad – where civil servants, board members etc were all afraid to give dissenting views.
• Treatment of the Greens – took them for granted, and locked them out of Government three times.
• Ethical lapses – lying about Peter Doone to force him out of office, Paintergate and the associated coverup etc. More worrying is seemingly unaware did anything wrong.
• Maori Party – did not even try to negotiate an agreement with in 2005, calling them last cab off the rank. A strategic blunder that had long term consequences.
• A tendency to blame others and distance herself. There is no way she did not know what Mike Williams was up to in Australia, yet puts him out to hang. Another example is when she let her DPS drivers get prosecuted for getting her to the rugby on time. Pretended she never even noticed the speed of 180 km/hr. Would have got huge kudos if she had fronted and said “I’m horrified that my drivers are being prosecuted for just doing their job”. Many Police never forgave her for not sticking up for them.
• Failed to rejuvenate in time. The 2008 list rejuvenation should have happened in 2005, and the 2007 Cabinet reshuffle in 2005.
• Seriously lost her judgement in third term on numerous issues – almost every decision forced out of her at a stage when too late to stop harm – Benson-Pope sacking, pledge card paying back, anti smacking law compromise. Let these drag on for months more than they should have.
• Electoral Finance Act – need more be said. Will always stain her record.
• Winston – despite massive evidence that Winston had lied numerous time, she would take no real action. Her decision to have Labour vote against the Privileges Committee report was a disgrace.

This isn’t comprehensive. It is just off the top of my head thinking about it for a couple of hours. There are probably more you can add to both the strengths and weaknesses.

If I have time, I’ll do a Michael Cullen one also.

Colin Espiner writes:

The change of Government last year left Helen Clark feeling rejected. She couldn’t and still can’t understand why Labour lost.

Nor her colleagues.

Like her Australian counterpart John Howard, or former British prime minister Tony Blair, or any other number of world leaders (in democracies at least), Clark fell victim to the curse of not knowing when it was time to go. We all thought we had given her a fair suck of the sav, to use the Kiwi vernacular.

If a party wants a good chance at a fourth term, it should have completed a massive rejuvenation by mid way through the third term – including the leadership. And for such rejuvenation to be credible, you have to start it towards the end of your first term. I hope National retires around six Ministers in 2011.

Clark felt rejected by us. She couldn’t and still can’t understand why Labour lost. Why voters wanted a fresh face on the ninth floor of the Beehive. She had given blood, sweat, and even a few tears to the job. Why wasn’t it enough?

Clark always wanted to remodel New Zealand in the social democratic traditions of Western European democracies, where the same party remains in power for decades and the support parties revolve around it.

This is what they looked to have after the 2002 election. And then Don Brash and John Key came along and spoiled the dream. Hence why they introduced the Electoral Finance Act.

Clark was the most popular New Zealand prime minister of modern times. No-one else, since the advent of reliable and regular political polling in the 1970s, has averaged such a consistently high approval rating.

This is true – her Preferred PM ratings stayed strong throughout.

The newspaper is only the first draft of history, but it is doubtful Clark’s long-term legacy will be judged as that of a great prime minister.

Great leaders have a vision, and the ability to get people to follow them to it. Clark was always more the manager than the visionary.

However, her intellect, determination, energy, accomplishments, and devotion to her country means she is likely to be remembered as a very, very, very good one.

An interesting perspective from Colin. I’m actually planning to do my own review of her career achievements, and her strengths and weaknesses – will blog it later this week. I hope it will be seen as pretty fair – I won’t be focusing on policy disagreements, but on political management, vision etc.

There has been some interesting commentary on Clark’s valedictory speech – mainly commenting on the total lack of reflection that she ever did anything wrong.

Guyon Espiner blogs:

Her valedictory was like her premiership: cautious and competent; meticulous and managerial.  I’d hoped Helen Clark might show us a flicker of feeling; a sliver of humanity; a scintilla of humility. …

It was similar when she spoke to us on TVNZ’s Q+A show last Sunday. There was no acknowledgement of her mistakes. Could she not have conceded to mishandling the anti-smacking law? To rushing the Electoral Finance Act? To being a little too lenient in her handling of Winston Peters?

I don’t think she considers any of them mistakes. Just as she has never conceded she was wrong to sign paintings that others painted. Her career has been marked by a refusal to say sorry and to blame everyone else.

I think she owed it to Labour to show a little contrition about the election defeat.

Clark sticks to the line that New Zealanders only voted National because they felt they could have the same policies with a new face. With that statement there is the underlying belief that before too long voters will realise the grave mistake they made in throwing her out.

The Dim-Post has a shorter version of the Clark speech:

Clark’s valedictory speech is at aroudn 5 pm today, and viewable on Parliament TV, and through the Parliament website.

I have watched (either in person or via TV) every former PM’s valedictory speech from Muldoon onwards – except for Geoffrey Palmer. All very different styles. Muldoon was sad yet powerful. Lange was hilarious. Bolger was excellent talking of prides and regrets and had a farewell from the Maori MPs at the end of it.

Moore was funny but with some bitterness. Shipley was dignified and optimistic.

For those who can’t watch it, I’ll probably live blog any noticeable parts.

THE SPEECH:

Starting now. I note Jonathan Hunt is in the House, next to the Speaker’s Chair. Clark says she has mixed emotions. Enrolled at Auckland Uni in 1968. Talking of big issues in 1968 such as Vietnam War, nuclear testing, South Africa.

Says Kirk’s independent foreign policy inspired her. Referred to Radio Hauraki breaking state radio monopoly by broadcasting from a boat in Hauraki Gulf.

Never imagined being PM when young, as senior politicians were all elderly men. Now paying tribute to Hunt and Anderton for getting her involved, plus Kirk again. She was foot solider in 1972.

Grew up on a farm in Waikato. Wider family had many political allegiances. Parents initially surprised by her political direction, but always personally supportive and now fully politically supportive. Mum too ill to be hear but 87 year old Dad is in gallery. Pays tribute to them both. Lots of clapping.

Stood in 1975 in Piako against Gentleman Jack Luxton and he was a Gentleman. Advice to young people in politics is to start off by running in a seat they probably won’t win as you learn a lot. Success is seldom instant, and quick wins can fade quickly.

Referred to how Muldoon said in his valedictory was how many more women were now in Parliament and how he found them somewhat frightening. Clark says it was mutual – especially if you tried to interject him

Attracted to politics by desire to make a difference. Has a sense of gratitude for opportunities NZ has given her. NZ was an escape for many from the class bound order of the UK. Detests social distinction and snobbery. Hence dislikes titular honours.

Focused in first six years on Mt Albert. Grateful to them. Chaired Foreign Affairs Select Committee and highlight was anti-nuclear law. Now talking about various Ministerial things she did. Helped bring in seven day trading (yay).

Plague on both your houses (National and Labour) in 1992 and 1993 saw MMP introduced. Lots of defections to minor parties in mid 1990s. Labour lost support to NZ First and Alliance and in mid 90s a poll had Labour on 14% and Clark on 2% as Preferred PM. In hindsight surprised concerned delegations to her door did not occur more often.

1999 saw Labour/Alliance Government with Green support. Believes they have made life better for many New Zealanders.

In last term in particular big focus was sustainability and believes it is vital for our international credibility. Jewel in crown was transfer of Molesworth Station to DOC to preserve for all NZers.

Talking about heritage projects like Te Ara.

NZers now very familiar with settlement of historical grievances and important they continue to be settled. Also apology to Samoa was important as was apology to Vietnam Veterans for what they endured in lack of recognition and support.

Proud that Maori are now significant economic stakeholders in NZ. Has enjoyed engagement with all the ethnic communities. Says it is inevitable that we will become a republic – not if, but when.

Pleased we stayed out of Iraq War but also that have rebuilt relationship with US. Big commitment to peace keeping.

Regards selection as UNDP Administrator as reflection on not just her, but NZ’s record internationally.

No regrets but it is time to go and let others lead. 2008 result was disappointing but in a democracy must respect the people’s will.

Never a solo act in politics. So many people have supported her. Her parents gave best possible start. Her sisters and their families always supportive of Peter and her. Peter has been a staunch supporter of her career, no matter how unpleasant it got. Lots of clapping from all sides.

Mt Albert backed her for 10 elections. Thanks to all those, esp Mt Albert electorate committee. Also electorate office staff – esp Joan Caulfield.

Thanks to all in Labour at all levels. Special thanks to Cullen. Friendships will be life long. Expects many texts and even the occassional tweet. Very well timed joke.

Thanks Jim A. Then Jeanette from Greens. Also honourable relationships with Dunne and Peters based on common interests. Also acknowledge Turia and thank her.

Relationships with National and ACT less significant. But acknowldge Key and Hide for their courtesy, especially recently. And previous MPs such as Paul East. Also talks to Bolger, Palmer and Moore.

Thanks DPMC CEOs and Cabinet Secretaries by name.  Also thanks MCH and Ministerial Services. Enjoyed work with SIS and GCSB. Trusts them and their staff. They work in the interests of NZ.

Also thanks MFAT for support on so many issues and summits and visits. Privilege to support NZ Defence Force and seeing their work overseas.

Thanking PM’s Office – Heather Simpson, Alec McLean and others. Also Police/DPS for keeping her alive! They are unsung heroes. Also kudos to VIP Drivers (I agree they rock). Privileged to continue using them, so not an end.

27 years since her maiden speech at 32. Said greatish wish was to have contributed ot making NZ a better place for peopel to live in. She thinks she has played her part – has been a privilege and an honour. Wishes Goff and Labour best for the next election and NZ the best for challenging times ahead.

All over. Clapping and hugs. Key gave a cheek kiss. Now given a Maori cloak by Nanaia.

Speech was very good. Covered the whole life, not just the achievements as PM, which makes it more interesting. No masively stand out moments, but nothing you can fault either. No bitterness or sniping, and no defensiveness.

I’ve supported Helen Clark’s candidacy for the UNDP job, and have always acknowledge her considerable political skills. It has been her policies and judgement (in the third term specially) I have had issues with. Her interview with the SST reminds me why:

She was surprised by the standing ovation she got in parliament. There were “a lot of people there obviously that I’d crossed swords with, but I don’t believe I’ve ever been seen as a nasty, mean-spirited person. Sure, I’ve been a tough and strong politician but you know not in a way I think of as being personally vindictive”.

So calling Don Brash cancerous and corrosive is not personally vindictive? Suggesting John Key shouts over his wife at home is not nasty or mean spirited? Let us not totally rewrite history here.

She read later that one person Act MP David Garrett had not joined in the applause, but “to be honest I wouldn’t recognise the person, so it’s not of any great moment. Maybe he will learn after a while in politics that there are some things you do and some things you don’t”.

This is the same Helen who walked out of the House as Don Brash was about to start his valedictory speech?

She won’t discuss her legacy, but she does note that during the election campaign “I talked till I was blue in the face saying, `Look, a change of government isn’t just changing a brand of toothpaste there will be substantial change’. “And I think people didn’t want to hear that. Now we see the things that are happening show that it wasn’t just about changing toothpaste. But you can’t rewind the film.”

She admits she is exasperated that her prophecies were ignored. “Of course, but I can’t do anything about it. I always think of that old homily that used to hang on my grandparents’ wall, which said, `Give me the grace to accept the things that I cannot change’.”

And again we get the sense of total denial that Labour did anything wrong. It is all the fault of the NZ public voting for a change, and not realising what they were doing. It just doesn’t even occur to Helen that peopel did vote for change. That they were sick of no tax cuts until the week before the election. They were sick of nanny state. They were sick of her defence of Winston’s behaviour. They were sick of law & order policies that made parole and bail easier to get, not harder.

And her so called prophecies consisted of hundreds of advertisements that said just one thing – you can not trust John Key. It was the most personal and negative campaign in NZ’s history – they did not run even a single positive television advertisement – they were 100% negative.

To be fair to Clark, her view appears to be shared by most in Labour. They still think the public was conned by John Key, and that all they have to do is wait for the public to come to their senses and beg Labour for forgiveness for not letting them rule for ever.

Some interesting parts to the Clark and Davis interview on Q&A. I do have to say though that I hope it will not become a permanent feature having an MPs partner on with them.

PAUL Exciting times. Looking back, what was the biggest mistake you made as Prime Minister, I’m sure you’re not gonna tell me your biggest mistake, can I change the question. What is the thing that you did which if you looked back you might do differently?

HELEN No I wouldn’t even go there because I never look back, that’s part of my style, I know journalists often got fed up with me saying move on move on, but I do. You know in politics there’s always an opposition employed to pick over the things you’ve done and why this why that why not the other way, well let them do it but I’m moving on to the next thing.

It is a real pity that Clark won’t answer this question, because I think you learn a lot from a person when they talk about what they would do differently. And while one should not dwell over long on mistakes, I find it useful to acknowledge them and learn from them.

PAUL Not so the one MP who’s name we cannot remember who did not stand up. Peter can I ask you this seriously, what was Helen like in the weeks or the days and the weeks after last year’s electoral loss?

PETER I think she felt rejected basically, because she felt she’d done a good job which I also believe and had put her best foot forward and had been frankly an almost incomparable Prime Minister and yet somehow the public had not seen that the same way. So it took some time for her to frankly come to terms with that and if I was in that position I’d feel the same way I guess.

This has a bit of an attitude about how the public made the wrong decisions, and Labour/Clark did nothing wrong. The reason I say this, is not to swipe at Davis, but because from all accounts most of the Labour Caucus are still in this space. They think John Key just conned the public and all they have to do is wait for him to be exposed.

FRAN Yes she has but I think it’s more than just you know meet and greet and all of that, I think where Helen Clark has scored is she’s also made a contribution and I saw her for instance one example chairing the OECD ministerial in Paris in 2003, and that was probably her first forum where she brought together a number of players, it was after September 11, there was a big you know fracas going on between Europe and America at that stage over the invasion of Iraq which had just happened but she brought together some disparate players to talk about what they could do to move economies forward and particularly also on the trade dialogue, so she chaired that, other actors paid tribute to her, so I’ve seen it there and I’ve also seen her at APEC where she has quietly moved a number of issues on to the agenda, for instance climate change in Korea, it wasn’t on the agenda, Australia claimed credit for it later but she put it there.

I quote this part from Fran, partly because it does highlight where Clark was skilled, but also to balance Fran’s later comment.

FRAN Well that’s right and it was interesting that she said she’s been empowered to do exactly that by Ban Ki-moon the Secretary General. I’d like to just go back, I think she will shake it up and she’s had that track record in New Zealand but one thing that struck me from that interview was that slight disconnect about not understanding why Helen Clark was voted out despite being competent, and to bring to the point one of the issues really was this issue about democracy in New Zealand with the Electoral Finance Act, that and together with Winston Peters that long running scandal that basically cost her her leadership here.

Disconnect is the right word for it. Now Labour have at least done a mea culpa over the Electoral Finance Act, but that was only one part of an arrogance the Government displayed on everything from the pledge card to Winston Peters. Frankly Labour should apologise for their disgraceful behaviour at the Privileges Committee and afterwards. Those MPs are not stupid and they all know that Winston knew about the donation. Yet they covered up for him. Until we get some mea culpas for that also, I’m not convinced they have understood why they lost the election.

The Herald Political Diary notes:

Just about all parties suspend politics for half an hour to honour Helen Clark for her appointment as United Nations Development Programme Administrator. She is given a standing ovation after John Key’s truly magnanimous speech and every leader’s speech is applauded as well – except that of Greens’ co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons who is not even applauded by her own MPs. In a piece of misjudgment, Fitzsimons lectures Clark on how she should do her job, concluding: “What we wish most for you is that in endless rounds of cocktail parties, travel, high-level meetings and negotiations to which you are no stranger, the most desperate people who rely on UNPD programmes to eat, to be housed, and healthy and educated are always top of your mind.” Does she really think cocktail parties are more important to Clark than the poorest and weakest?

No wonder Helen never let the Greens into Government, if this is how sanctimonious they get. The full lecturing speech is here.

Helen Clark has been confirmed by the UN General Assembly and is due to start on 20 April.

Now she may not manage that, but when could a by-election be if she does leave on 20 April?

1. Clark will resign under s55(1)(f) of the Electoral Act – Mon 20 Apr
2. Vacancy published in Gazette – Tue 21 Apr
3. GG must issue writ within 21days of Gazette – so from 22 Apr to 12 May.
4. Nominations normally close 6 days after the writ – from 28 Apr to 18 May
5. Polling Day could be any Saturday from 25 May to 13 June (20 to 27 days after noms close)
6. The writ must be returned within 50 days so that is by 11 Jun to 1 July

Graeme E will no doubt correct me, if the dates are wrong!

I doubt they want a by-election in May when the budget has just been passed, and likewise not over a long (QB) weekend, so I would pick 13 June at this stage.

The Herald reports that Peter Davis is not moving to New York, with Helen Clark due to his work at Auckland University.

In some ways this is not surprising, as he previously worked in Christchurch for many years. Of course New York is a hell of a lot further away, and you won’t be catching up at weekends.

This will of course excite some people greatly, who are convinced that the Clark/Davis marriage is a sham and in reality Davis has shagged random men in dozens of cities around the world, and Clark has slept with half the female Labour MPs and staff. If even 10% of the rumours that circulate about them are true, both Clark and Davis could rival Charlie Sheen for stamina.

This is one of those topics that I hate, and as many people can attest any promoting of said rumours will get instant demerits.

In the past I blogged my disapproval of the HoS asking Peter Davis about his sex life, and also blogged my disapproval of the media stories over Peter Davis on 2005 election night.

As I said some people will see this as proof of various theories. It isn’t. It is merely proof that Peter Davis values his professional career a lot, and doesn’t want to chuck in a good job. Clark I imagine will be travelling a lot, and so even if you lived in New York, you might not see a lot of each other.

At the end of the day, MPs private lives should be private unless there is gross hypocrisy involved.

The well informed Trans-Tasman has just told subscribers that Helen Clark has been appointed Administrator of the United Nationals Development Programme. The role, is the third most senior at the UN, and needs to be confirmed by the UN General Assembly.

Kiwiblog broke the news on 7 February that Clark was seeking the job, and that the NZ Government was backing her for it.

Congratulations go to Helen Clark for gaining the job. As I blogged back on 7 February I do think she will do a good job, and on balance supported her candidacy – not without reservations of course. And the fact she was successful does show she is highly respected for the contribution she can make to development issues.

Kudos should go to John Key and Murray McCully for their strong backing of Clark, and putting the NZ Government in full support of her bid. It is in New Zealand’s interest to have a NZer in the third most important role there and they look good for putting party politics to one side. Despite the many imperfections of the UN, we are better for its existence (parts of it could go though).

Incidentally I ran into Clark last night in the basement of the Beehive and noted to a Nat MP afterwards that she was looking pretty happy. I had heard a few days that she was the likely successful candidate, but not that she ws home and hosed.

Phil Goff should also be pleased. Once Helen leaves the country he may manage to make second place in the Preferred PM polls

On Breakfast this morning, Phil Goff said that Helen Clark never called Coasters feral inbreds, after Paul Henry referred to not all Coasters being feral inbreds, as your predecessor called them. Goff said:

I think that was unfair to Helen, I don’t think she ever used those words.

If you go back and check your records, you will find that’s wrong.  People put those words into her mouth.

Now this happened in 2000. I can’t find an original story, but I did find a 2002 NZPA story that provides some quotes:

Prime Minister Helen Clark made her first return to the West Coast today since she described some pro-logging West Coasters as “feral” and compared them to lynch mobs.

Her comments in early 2000 came as the Government ban on the logging of all native trees had emotions running high in the area.

Miss Clark said at the time she had been in a room where someone had talked about shooting conservationists up trees like possums caught in car headlights.

“It’s a bit (like a) Kentucky area (in the southern United States),” she said, adding she did not like “lynch mob mentalities”.

Attitudes of some on the West Coast could be “fairly feral“, she said.

So she definitely said feral, but maybe said they were a southern lynch mob rather than inbred? Not sure that is much better!

Does anyone have the original West Coast Times story?

Trans-Tasman has just put out a special newsletter with some exclusive news:

The Trans-Tasman Political Letter reports Jim McLay will be NZ’s permanent representative to the UN in New York. McLay will take up the post when the present ambassador Rosemary Banks finishes her term in May.

This is a very interesting move. Normally political appointments are made as Ambassadors to countries.I would not call them a cruisy job because they do have work to do, but it is a pleasant job shall we say.

The permanent rep to the UN is a very full on busy role. None of the perks of being an Ambassador – you’re stuck in UN meetings all day.

This implies that the Government wants a rep who can display political leadership within the UN – suggesting that maybe the Government intends to get involved with efforts to reform the UN.

Hopefully this may mean the Government will withdraw NZ’s bid to be elected to the discredited Human Rights Council.

Foreign Minister McCully has indicated he wants the current professional diplomats in Washington (Roy Ferguson) and in London (Derek Leask) to serve out their terms.

So no political appointments there for now.

Interviews to find a successor for retiring MFAT CEO Simon Murdoch will begin in Wellington next week.

The name most people put forward is the DPMC CEO Maarten Weavers.

Meanwhile, Trans-Tasman says former PM Helen Clark is on the three-person short-list for the post of director of the UNDP. The Govt has been seeking international support for her appointment and is understood to have gained the support of Korea, which could be influential on the thinking of the current UN Secretary-General. Clark had a one-on-one meeting with the Korean president Lee Myung-Bak in Auckland.

The Secretary-General is from Korea, so that is significant.

As expected, Helen Clark has made the shortlist for the UNDP Adminstrator job. NZPA reports she is now in New York for an interview with the UN Secretary-General.

Hard to know her chances, as it depends of course on who ther other candidates are. Also whom influential countries like the US support.

Mike Moore has said he thinks Helen Clark is the best candidate for the UNDP Administrator job, and has been lobbying on her behalf. He thinks she has a strong chance to win, rating her ahead of the unanmed other candidates.

I have heard from a highly reliable source that at the recent Pacific Islands Forum, support was canvassed by the NZ Government for a candidacy by Helen Clark to take up the post of Administrator of the UN Development Programme.

A few weeks ago on 12 January 2009, the UN Secretary-General announced that the current Administrator, Kemal Dervis, was retiring. His four year term ends on 15 August 2009.

The role is a very very senior one at the United Nations. It is basically third only to the Secretary-General and the Deputy Secretary-General. They chair the UN Development Group, which is a committee consisting of the heads of all UN funds, programmes and departments dealing with development issues. This is as big as it gets basically.

My initial source is not anyone within Government or Parliament, or anyone associated with them – I am happy to sign an affidavit to that. I have spies everywhere As the story is potentially quite significant I e-mailed the PM’s Chief Press Secretary with the guts of what I had learnt, and asked if they could comment on its accuracy. They have declined to comment which suggests to me it is not without substance.

The role is not elected at large, but appointed by the Secretary-General, and confirmed by the General Assembly. So one does need to have good consensus behind the appointment – however it is not a lobbying game to the same extent say the WTO Director-General was.

Helen will not be the only candidate. It is likely there will be a couple of candidates from within the UN bureaucracy – development and aid specialists. So it will be a choice between a candidate with political leadership experience vs candidates with fulltime development backgrounds. While the decision is the Secretary-General’s, Barack Obama’s support will be influential as the UN wants to build ties with the new administration. All bar the last two UNDP Administrators have been Americans.

The annual budget of the UNDP is close to US$5 billion and they work in 166 countries. This is arguably the most senior job one could expect Helen to obtain as the UN Secretary-General job is done by rotation amongst the regions.

So what’s my reaction to the candidacy, if it is in play? I think it goes without saying that I have not been Helen’s biggest fan. It doesn’t concern me that she led a Government whose policies I disagreed with. Talent doesn’t come from just one side of the political spectrum. And I have generally regarded Clark as an able political administrator – as have most of the public.

But I do have some concerns. To me the pre 2005 Helen Clark is different to the post 2005 Clark. I’m not sure what happened, but somewhere along the way Helen seemed to lose her previously reliable judgement. From 2005 to 2008 she made the wrong call on almost every big issue such as the deliberate over-spending, the initial refusal to pay back the pledge card costs, the inquiry into Taito Philip Field, the Benson-Pope sagas, the Electoral Finance Act, the “trust” campaign against John Key and most of all her continual defence of Winston that defied comprehension. I saw a disturbing commitment to the ends justify the means, which is a slippery slope.

So if the last three years had never happened, I would say supporting the candidacy would be a no brainer.  I feel much more conflicted after the last three years, but then I look at the particulars of the position:

• Helen has a lifetime of experience and passion on “development” issues and would bring that to the job. If it was IMF Managing Director I’d be worried
• She has a formidable international network that would be of great benefit in the job
• As a former Prime Minister she would bring considerable status to the role, making it easier to get in the door with donor nations
• New Zealand has a very proud history of doing our part, despite our small economy, with development issues and the opportunity to have a New Zealander heading up the UNDP is a once in a lifetime chance.

So I conclude that just as we supported Mike Moore, Denis Marshall, SImon Upton and Don McKinnon to international jobs, we should also support the candidacy of Helen Elizabeth Clark to the position of Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme. There is a time to put partisan politics behind us.

I am sure there will be plenty of people agreeing and disagreeing in the comments! For those who think I have lost my marbles, well then consider that Angelina Jolie is is a UNDP Global Ambassador, so if Helen gets the top job that increases the chances Angelina may visit New Zealand

John Roughan looks at Helen Clark:

Through the latter half of the 20th century it became evident that National was this country’s “natural” government. Labour would be given an occasional turn but National was the default setting.

This was the state of politics Helen Clark set out to change when she came to power at the Century’s end.

And she did. There is absolutely no way the National is the natural party of Government. Of course MMP is a factor in this also.

For six years she would take no political risks. She followed the political studies textbook, doing no more or less than she had promised at the election, suspending ministers at the first whiff of embarrassment, returning media calls, making sure her decisions were understood.

Those decisions, if not exactly courageous, were usually in accord with common sense and her answers to interviewers were invariably concise, informative and fairly convincing.

I note that Roughan talks about her first six years as different to her last three. I have often said the third term Helen was very different to the first two terms.

But she fell short of greatness for me. She lacked a largeness of spirit that truly great leadership requires. At one level that deficiency could be seen in her response to the suggestion that Sir Roger Douglas could be “our greatest living New Zealander”.

He is not that either, for different reasons, but now that she has rescued Labour from his legacy her comment could have been more generous – as generous as John Key was to her nomination.

Indeed, and when was the last time you heard John Key denigrate an opponent?

Waitangi asks a lot of political leaders. They will not be feted there until they have had the courage to front up to whatever might happen. Helen Clark would not, could not.

She claimed she would not risk the dignity of her office but that was not the real reason.

Well there were so many reasons. Such as not being a morning person as a reason not to attend the dawn service.

Oh this is almost priceless hypocrisy. John Key is being criticised for daring to have a holiday from Xmas Eve until middle of this week. How dare he spend time with his wife and children. But even better is look at who is making the criticism:

Former Prime Minister Helen Clark, on holiday in Europe, criticised the Government for taking a “laissez-faire” approach to the economic crisis.

“The rest of the world is aware there’s an economic crisis on, they are aware there’s a huge international crisis in Gaza, and the New Zealand government is on holiday,” she said.

“At the end of the day, when you’re elected, you don’t have a 100 per cent holiday.”

Okay, get this. They quote Helen Clark, from her holiday in Europe, criticising John Key for being on holiday. Seriously – how pathetic is that.

Even worse, is to have Clark talk about how when you are elected, you can’t have a 100% holiday. Is this the same Helen Clark who when PM had her holiday arrangements in such secrecy that not only did the media not know where she was, neither did her own staff, with one exception?

Stuff has an NZPA story on Key and Clark:

Asked today if he would offer her a diplomatic post, Mr Key said it was an option.

“Look I think if that was a step she wanted to take that would definitely be a live option,” he said on TVNZ’s Breakfast programme.

“But at this point I think she is just taking stock of what she wants to do – gathering her own thoughts – including about what she might want that to be.”

Well, ok I can understand wanting to get the predecessor out of the country, but do we really need an Ambassador to Rwanda?

Actually I do understand Foreign Minister Murray McCully has supplied a list of suitable countries for MFAT to vet as appropriate for Ambassador Clark.

Helen doesn’t want to spend the next three years as a backbench Opposition MP. And Phil Goff doesn’t want her to overshadow him. So normally we would expect to see a by-election in Mt Albert next year.

But it is proving rather difficult for Labour. You see Michael Cullen, being a List MP, will probably resign from Parliament in early 2009. This will bring in No 37 on the Labour List, Damien O’Connor. Now some in Labour probably think Damien should give way to new blood, but they’ll tolerate him returning.

Then we have Helen resigning, which will trigger a by-election. Labour will need to select a candidate for this seat, and let there be no mistake – Helen will pick the candidate. And who is favoured to get her blessing – List MP Phil Twyford. Twyford is highly regarded.

But here is the problem, Twyford is already an MP. So what happens if he wins the Mt Albert by-election? Well he would then resign his seat as a List MP, and that would bring in the next person on the Labour list. And who is No 38? It’s Judith Tizard!

Now Helen has won Mt Albert with some big majorities, but a lot of that has been personal. The party vote has been much closer. And if Mt Albert voters works out that voting for Twyford means Tizard returns to Parliament, then the seat could fall to a good National candidate. I can imagine a lot of money would be spent pointing out the nightmare scenario.

Now some might say, it’s easy. Just get Judith to agree to stand aside. After all, she probably doesn’t want to be back there by herself.

But who is next on the list. Well the next four candidates are Mark Burton, Mahara Okeroa, Martin Gallagher and Dave Hereora. The four stooges without the humour. Persuading Mt Albert residents to vote for any of those to return to Parliament could be a challenge.

So who is next in place 43? Louisa Wall. Now I think Louisa was a talented MP and would be a boon to Labour’s ranks. But she is seriously unpopular with many of her colleagues who don’t want her back. So who is next at 44? Lesley Soper – she would attract more shoe throwing in a Labour Caucus meeting than George W Bush attracts in Iraq.

Spots 45 to 49 are all vacant as they won their electorate seats. Finally in spot 50 you have Hamish McCracken. Well at least he is an Aucklander. However having been given three unwinnable seats and rankings in a row, he is hardly in high favour.

So you see the problem for Labour. Either Helen has to stay on for the full term, or someone other than Twyford is the candidate, or they risk the public working out voting for Labour will bring a plonker back in on the list and losing your predecessor’s seat in a byelection would see Goff rolled.

So I am picking Helen won’t be going anywhere until they work out a way around their dilemna.

My day started in Auckland. I stayed up there for an extra day as National’s Northern Region had its Christmas Party on Sunday Night. The Regional Chair spoke about how well the Party did locally n both the party and the electorate vote.

John Key gave a very funny speech. There were serious parts about the future of mass membership parties, the financial crisis etc but I remember the part about his son ringing him up a few days ago, from the place he was babysitting at and complaining he was hungry. When John asked what he was meant to do, he was informed that as Prime Minister he can surely arrange for some pizzas of he can run the country. The story continued with how impressed the Pizza Hut staff were to have the PM call in an order, and now that they have his cellphone number they let him know how he is doing in the job

This morning I was on the same flight as Helen Clark, and in fact was set to be just behind her in the queue to board the plane. I was just about to greet her automatically with “Good Morning Prime Minister” until I realised that of course is no longer the salutation. I actually had to stop and think for quite a few seconds about what the correct greeting would be, and settled on “Miss Clark”. But by then she had left the line.

Headed into Parliament a bit after 1 pm, and for the first time in nine years sat on the side of the visitors gallery opposite the Government benches. It was nice to be able to see the Nats back on the Speaker’s right.

There was a TV set up in the gallery, so we could see the three Commissioners cross the road and walk through the grounds and corridors of Parliament to the House. The Governor-General is not allowed in the House so he sends three Commissioners to do the opening. They were the Chief Justice, the President of the Court of Appeal and the Chief High Court Judge.

Dame Sian read out the various proclamations and asked the MPs to elect a Speaker. The Commissioners then exited the House and the Clerk of the House proceeded to swear MPs in. They come up in alphabetical order and are grouped by whether they swear or affirm the oath and on whether they speak in English or Maori.

Lots of MPs did modified versions of the oath, as their way to try and score a point. It got a bit tiresome really, as after they did their version, they then did the official one. Several MPs tried to add on references to the Treaty of Waitangi (including a European MP), and Sio tried it in Samoan before doing it in English. I did have to laugh though at Hone Harawira’s one which bore no resemblance at all to the oath as he went on about a duty to Te Tai Tokerau, Aotearoa, his constituents, the public etc. He then did the much shorter standard one.

The funniest part was when they called Darren Hughes and Parekura Horomia up together. This was a slip up as Parekura was to do it in Maori, and Darren in English. Rather than make a fuss Darren said it in Maori with Parekura – he didn’t even do a Milli Vanilli but managed the words well.

Then the election of Speaker at around 2.45 pm. Lockwood was the only nominee and certainly looked the part. He did a really good acceptance speech and referred to being in Parliament when Speaker Gerry Wall threw out the PM and the Opposition Leader on the same day. He said he hoped not to emulate that record but would do so if it was necessary!

This then led to several other MPs telling uncomplimentary stories of Speaker Wall (generally regarded as worst Speaker in living memory) as they congratulated Lockwood. Talking of Lockwood, Audrey Young has a blog on what she sees as his strengths and weaknesses for the job.

Normally after the House elects a Speaker-Elect (believe it or not the GG has to confirm them in the role), the Speaker-Elect travels to Government House to be confirmed and ask the GG to respect the privileges of the House etc. But as Government House is being renovated, we got a rare treat and MPs (and their guests) got to witness the ceremony being held in the Legislative Council Chamber. Took around half an hour all up.

As we were waiting I was chatting to a Minister about special votes and overseas votes and how he was keen for me to do some analysis around them. As I agreed to do so, one of the new Labour MPs sitting just in front of us turns around, and says she’d like a copy also

Actually I’ll probably stick it on the blog once I do finish it, as it is all sourced from public information.

After the GG/Speaker ceremony, there was a function in the State Banquet Hall, hosted by the GG. Got to meet a few of the new MPs I had not yet met, which was nice. What was funny was when talking to one new Labour MP and her husband, the photographer asked if we wanted our photo taken together. I quipped that it would probably knock 1,000 votes off her majority so we declined

Finally as I was leaving Parliament, I had the good fortune to be on the forecourt just as Emma Daken arrived. I blogged about Emma a few days ago – she is walking the length of New Zealand to raise money for cystric fibrosis research. MP Katrina Shanks pointed her out to me. Katrina, like many MPs, has been really supportive of Emma’s efforts. She’s now raised $21,000 but still some way off the $50,000 target. You can donate online to here at this site. I find what people like Emma are doing is really inspiring in its selflessness.

So a pretty full day. Tomorrow is the state opening and the GG reads out the speech from the throne. After that I expect the House will elect a Deputy Speaker, two Assistant Speakers and also appoint MPs to Select Committees. They will then start the address in reply debate, but also go into urgency to introduce and pass some of the laws they promised.

The maiden speeches will start tomorrow, and the best speeches you will ever hear in Parliament are (in my order) valedictory speeches, maiden speeches and then speeches on conscience issues. With 35 MPs that is a heck of a lot of maiden speeches (I guess Sir Roger won’t get one though) so I doubt I can cover them all, but will try to cover a few of them anyway.

Just watching Trade Minister Tim Groser on Agenda, and it is nice to see someone who is so obviously an expert talk on their portfolio area. This isn’t always possible (or resirable) in every area, but likewise it is nice to have one of NZ’s top lawyers as Attroney-General, rather than a non-lawyer.

Later on Mark Unsworth from Saunders Unsworth talked about the new MPs, and opportunities for promotion. He was pretty complementary of the new MPs from both parties (as I have been also). But what I thought was most interesting was his words on the difference between Ministers in John Key’s Cabinet and Helen Clark’s. Unsworth said it won’t be three strikes and you’re out for Ministers, but more like one strike and you are out. And unlike Clark there won’t be a recycling of Ministers six months later by putting them back in, but once you are out, you stay out.

While I don’t think it will be quite as black and white as that, I do think that life will be very different for Ministers under John Key. Up until her final term, Clark had very few realistic options for promotion, so Ministers were safe. Key has a number of very competent and ambitious MPs in the 2005 intake who will be keen to be Ministers within the next term, and a fair few of the 2008 intake will be aiming to become Ministers in the second term (if there is one) if not before.

An article in the Herald on public law and lobbying, mainly focused on Mai Chen.

That said, about a third of the firm’s work is litigation, and her current workload includes two particularly high-profile cases. She has been hired by former Auckland District Health Board member Tony Bierre to sue former Prime Minister Helen Clark for defamation over comments she made during the Labtests fiasco. Chen is also acting for National Party advisers Crosby/Textor, who are suing journalist Nicky Hager over comments he made to Radio New Zealand.

Both those law suits look fascinating.