Colin James on can Key do it?
Colin James notes:
Sir Robert Muldoon had to wait 15 years after coming into Parliament to make Prime Minister. Jim Bolger took 18 years. So did Helen Clark. Can John Key do it in a bit over six and set a record?
Colin them looks at the necessary strategy for Key to retain his lead:
First, discipline. Not for decades have National MPs been so concerned to be on message. They want to win, sense they are going to and accept the necessary self-restraint. The parallel is the iron unity Kevin Rudd instilled in his Australian Labor Party.
Second, paralleling Rudd again, no targets for Labour to score easy points. Nuclear ships, a critical turning point in 2005, have gone. Iraq has gone. “Privatisation” (of state-owned enterprises) has gone. The Exclusive Brethren have been sent to purgatory. Maori-bashing is out. Climate change is in.
Even the usual Labour clincher that National will cut social services carries less weight after a year of damaging attacks on the Clark regime’s public health services. Labour’s “eviction” notices which swung state house dwellers’ votes in 2005 will cut less ice now that National is led by a onetime (brief) state house tenant.
Third (Rudd again), three or four distinguishing points, preferably painting Key and National as the future and Clark and Labour as the past.
All sensible stuff – discipline, burying toxically unpopular issues and a few simple but important points of difference.
Fourth, a positive, prime ministerial Key. That requires Bill English and other MPs to do most of the attacking. It requires Key to work (and he has been, a little) on his sloppy elocution and over-folksy general presentation, in order to project gravitas …
Fifth, a credible front bench. There is work to do and the word is it will be done. Some on the front bench cannot expect to be there in a Key Cabinet.
Sixth, good relations with small parties.
No 4 is well in train, and No 6 is relatively healthy in that ACT, United Future and Maori parties all seem to have a positive relationship with National, while not of course agreeing on all issues. Russel Norman’s outrageous attacks on Bill English’s integrity mean that the Greens are only serious about Labour (which means once again they will get few concessions). And as for NZ First, who can know? Winston Peters and Jim Bolger absolutely loathed each other to a degree only a Bosnian Serb could relate to, yet they did a deal. If NZ First does make it back, who knows. One big issue is will Peters pledge (as he did in 2005) to give the first priority for negotiations to the largest party?
Finally, worth looking at No 5. There are some frontbench National MPs operating extremely well, and will form the backbone of a Cabinet if they win. There is also some good talent in the new intakes who need some experience to be safe and competent Ministers. They may not become Ministers in 2008 but will start to get grumpy if they don’t make it in 2011 (if National wins both times obviously). This will put pressure on some of the MPs who have been there for a while. Key will have a challenging job managing the tensions, but it isn’t one he should shy from. No-one has a divine right to the front bench, or to becoming a Minister, or even to staying a Minister for an entire Government’s term.
Obviously the short-term issue is to have a strong front-bench in Opposition, and spokespersons who can develop good policy. I don’t see a huge need to have any major changes before the election, even though there may be some tinkering.
The real challenge will be, if Key becomes PM, does he has a huge Ministry of 30 or so people like Clark or go for quality over quantity? The more Ministers you have, the more targets for what would be a pretty strong Labour Opposition. Also Key will need to avoid the mistakes Clark made of leaving renewal to near the end of her third term. Even if National says gets nine years in Government, MPs should not expect to be Ministers throughout,except for a couple of key personnel. Renewal will need to start at the end of the first term, not subsequent terms.