Opinion: Jacinda Ardern 'Baby Fever' makes National's struggle for attention harder as political year swings into action

January 25, 2018

MPs have decsended on Ratana to kick off the potitical year.

No-one spoke a truer word than the late Jim Anderton when he declared that one bad day in Government is much better than a thousand good days in Opposition.

One of the best prime ministers that the Labour Party never had, this Titan of New Zealand politics was more than qualified to make that assertion.

First as a Labour MP and then subsequently as leader of the Alliance, the NewLabourParty and (finally) the Progressives, the long-serving Christchurch MP spent 18 of the 27 years he racked up on Parliament's payroll either in Opposition, or enforced or voluntary exile.

That adds up to more than 6,500 days outside Government — a figure which makes for grim reading for the current crop of freshly-minted, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed National backbenchers who secured an entry ticket to Parliament at last year's election.

Some of those recruits — more than you might think — will have been fantasising that their qualities and qualifications would very soon see them summoned to Bill English's office and rewarded with something better than being designated as the party's fourth-ranked MP on the Review of Outdated and Ancient Regulations and Other Turgid Matters of Absolutely No Interest to Anyone Else select committee.

The National leader says the government will need his party's support to get the deal over the line.

With the summer holidays already a fast-fading memory and the first sitting of Parliament in 2018 looming large in being less than a week away, their phones will have remained tellingly silent.

The veracity of Anderton's observation will be dawning on many of those backbenchers who make up the bulk of the 47 MPs in National's 56-strong caucus who prior to last September's ballot had yet to endure the frustration, boredom, irrelevance and sheer pointlessness of what passes for life on the wrong side of the House.

Many of the 2017 intake might have yet to wake up to the bleak reality of being a member of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, however.

Ms Ardern wanted New Zealand to take in 150 Australia asylum seekers being held at a detention centre on Manus Island.

That is because circumstances combined to present a far rosier picture of National's predicament in the two months between October's swearing-in of the new Parliament and the House's adjournment for Christmas, than would normally have been the case for a party thrown out of power.

In capturing more seats in Parliament than any other party, National could claim to have "won" that election. The party could also make the valid claim that Winston Peters never had the slightest intention of going into coalition with National.

The latter's numerical dominance in the House meant National could argue Labour has had no mandate for removing National's shibboleths under its 100-day action plan.

Labour rightly rubbishes that claim. Nevertheless, National's status as the largest party in the House has given it a valuable psychological edge in the daily game of one-upmanship conducted by the two old foes.

Along with some minor procedural victories which brought Labour's competence in running the House into question, National went into the Christmas break with morale seemingly far higher than would be expected for a party which had not long lost its grip on power.

It has proved to be a false dawn for National, however.

Just how National's advantage in numbers plays out remains uncertain, especially when it comes to trying to block or delay things which Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens wish to do in a hurry.

The more relevant question is how National might otherwise grab voters' attention — and more so given attention is currently focused almost exclusively on the new administration in the Beehive.

For now, few voters are interested in what National has to say. That is the norm for any party thrown into Opposition after a lengthy period in power.

National’s struggle for attention is fast becoming even more of a slog as result of the meteoric rise in the confidence and can-do attitude of a new prime minister who seems fearless when it comes to addressing matters which other parties have placed in the too hard basket.

No-one predicted that. And no-one predicted something that has come right out of left field and made National’s efforts to regain traction even more difficult — namely Baby Fever.

There is a new kid on the block. It would be going too far to suggest Jacinda Ardern’s pregnancy has created a Black Hole into which anything with a political connection will disappear this side of her June delivery date —and for quite some time afterwards.

Labour's long-suffering spin-doctors will be as happy as pigs rollicking deep in farm-yard muck, however.

The National Party leader questions how the plan will work when senior ministers can't agree on what it will look like.

The photo-opportunities will be almost limitless —and, more important, priceless in political value.

The pregnancy is a bonanza for the news media. The feeding frenzy will become ever more manic. Every conceivable angle will be explored to the point of exhaustion — and beyond.

The public’s reaction to last Friday’s announcement has been almost universally positive. The goodwill shown towards Ardern and her partner, Clarke Gayford, has been almost unprecedented in its extent and depth.

You would probably have to delve back in New Zealand history to the death of Norman Kirk in 1974 to find another such relatively recent example of when there has been such a unified outpouring of genuine emotion towards a politician. That is because in both cases the human element transcends the political.

The difference is that Kirk’s death was an occasion for national mourning which was accentuated by the shock of his seemingly sudden passing.

In Ardern’s case, the last few days have witnessed a mood of national celebration.

Woe betide any politician who cuts across that sentiment or who seeks to exploit it for his or her own advantage.

Even a serial self-promoter like Winston Peters is smart enough to realise that there is no future in him trying to eclipse or upstage Ardern and her progeny despite him being gifted a six-week stint as Acting Prime Minister while she takes maternity leave.

In truth, the “Acting” element of the title confers no extra power. If a major crisis was to come out of nowhere which required tough decisions, Peters would act in concert and consultation with the rest of the Labour-dominated Cabinet.

Final decisions would ultimately be made by Ardern, even if the subsequent announcement was issued under Peters’ name.

The one small plus for National is that as Acting Prime Minister, Peters will be obliged to uphold the Government line on any matter even if that differs from New Zealand First’s stance.

National will likely be already combing the pages of New Zealand First’s 2017 manifesto for instances where the latter party is severely at odds with Labour in readiness for a likely bombardment of New Zealand First’s trenches which will seek to embarrass Peters while also driving a wedge between him and Labour.

Peters’ dilemma is that he risks being suffocated by blanket media coverage of Ardern. New Zealand First is already slipping perilously close to the 5 per cent threshold.

Peters’ colleagues will become increasingly nervous and quite possibly ultimately fractious as they watch their prospects of re-election evaporating before their very eyes.

Now is not the time to indulge in identity politics or matters of party differentiation within the current two-party coalition. Now is not the time to panic.

From Labour’s point of view, Peters’ task while he is notionally in charge of the country is to exude confidence in the stickability and longevity of the coalition and the wider three-party governing arrangement which includes the Greens, while displaying competence in the implementation of its policies.

Horror of horrors, as Acting Prime Minister, Peters may have to swallow his pride and actually communicate directly with James Shaw.

But don’t bet on it.

If Peters adopts a modus operandi which puts co-operation ahead of self-aggrandisement, he may repair some of the damage he incurred as a result of his at times obstreperous behaviour during the shambolic coalition talks.

Peters hardly needs to be told that ill-disciplined rants at all and sundry will jar increasingly with the public’s mood as the birth draws closer.

If he embarrasses Ardern when he is supposed to be helping her, he and New Zealand First will pay a big political price — one that his struggling party no longer has the luxury of being able to afford.

But Peters does not need reminding of that either.

He knows full well that the only show pony that voters will tolerate being on public display when June rolls around will be of the stuffed-toy variety.

SHARE ME

More Stories