Opinion: While Ardern retires to nurse her real baby, her political dependents, NZ First and Greens, are vulnerable

The next six weeks without Jacinda Ardern in the political fray should narrow down for Simon Bridges what his true battle leading into the 2020 election is - to completely discredit NZ First and the Greens.

If Bridges is going to hitchhike into power on the enduring popularity of the National Party, despite his own woeful preferred PM ratings, then his best bet may be to make sure both minor parties don't make it back into Parliament.

Based off early polling this electoral term, such a scenario is possible.

So while the Prime Minister is off nursing her real baby, her political dependents - the two adopted, minor Government parties, won't have their guardian to redirect public attention through strength of personality, unflappable temperament, and the trivia of her domestic life (not that she herself exploits this).

Despite National's concerted publicity ad campaign for the voters to "get to know Simon", they could be better off, at least for the next six weeks, turning him into a ghost, and highlighting his competencies rather than his personality.

This could be in the same mould as Bill English who, for the first 27.5 years of his political life was a figure of restraint and surgically precise criticism. He was transformed during the 2017 election campaign when the emergence of Ardern, with her charisma, forced him to conjure his own.

It may come to pass over the next month or so that such a stoic figure contrasts favourably with the giddy enthusiasm coming from the Government side of the house, with no political phenom in the top seat to outshine them.

The reason for this is the minor coalition parties, even under the watch of Ardern, have shown themselves more than willing to put their own grasp for political relevance ahead of Government cohesiveness.

And with approval ratings like the Greens and NZ First have had since getting into government, it's not so unreasonable that self-interest has been driving their actions - even without an election looming.

In the last 1 NEWS Colmar Brunton poll, on May 28, NZ First registered below the threshold to re-enter Parliament at 4.2 per cent approval, and the Greens were right on the line at five per cent.

In the equivalent poll prior to that, on February 19, Labour surged to a 15-year high of 48 per cent approval. It came at the expense of the Greens, then down two points to five per cent, and NZ First, down two points also to a measly three per cent.

Following this first poll in Government, Greens leader James Shaw even explicitly said they were concerned about Labour directly stealing their votes. He also subtly reiterated that Labour was not their master, there was no formal coalition between them, and the Greens were more than willing to act exclusively in their best interests.

"This [loss of votes to Labour] is something that we are really cognisant of. That's one of the reasons we decided to go into a confidence and supply agreement rather than a full coalition," Shaw said at the time of the February poll results.

Massey University politics Associate Professor Grant Duncan said all parties represented this term should be fully aware that a two-party Parliament is a possible scenario next term.

"You certainly have to allow for the possibility that National continues at 44-odd, as at the last election, because there's a staunch support for them that doesn't want to budge and wants to stick with the National brand regardless of who the leader is," Associate Professor Duncan said at the time.

"The nightmare situation for Labour is if both NZ First and the Greens fail to get back into Parliament, they both fall below five per cent, even if Labour does quite well but can't top National and we end up with a two-party Parliament with National getting a single party majority.

"It's not impossible, potentially with Simon Bridges hanging in there, provided he doesn't completely screw up, he could end up Prime Minister."

But hanging in there may require adaptation, because with baby in tow, it's nigh-on-impossible Bridges will ever get near Ardern in preferred PM stakes.

One other reason Bridges may be better to err on the side of humility, and let reason and straight bat rhetoric predominate over an attacking approach over the next month, is the unfortunate fact that he doesn't do outrage convincingly, or eloquently.

Case in point, his Budget 2018 reply speech: It was criticised as a mix of bluster and hyperbole that cast him in the all too-well fitting role of a schoolboy faking conviction in a debating contest.

On that occasion, Winston Peters was among those very keen to point those traits out to him.

"Mr Bridges' speech today reinforces why he is failing: no vision, no plan, no ideas, just carping and whining. It was poorly delivered, should have been touched up by a speech therapist as to the pronunciation, by a desperate pretender," he said to snickers from his side.

"It was a speech devoid of ideas, riddled with cliches. Speeches like that is why they created the word vacuous. (Bridges interjects) Let me tell you sunshine, I'm here after all these years because we know how to get a poll up.

"Here is what the voting public have concluded about the leader of the National Party: What you see is what you get, is Mr Simon slick Bridges. Mr Simon soundbite Bridges. Mr Simon one-way Bridges, and yes Mr Simon short-term Bridges."

While a debate is what Bridges may enjoy as an ex-Crown prosecutor, it may not be what he should pursue, given the kind of insults hurled then by Peters clearly illustrates he is the true king of the soundbite.

So instead of going head-to-head with Winston, Bridges may be better off letting the veteran's own boldness run its course into questionable territory without Ardern to qualify the Government's actual stance.

One example of this was the Deputy PM's claim in March this year there was no evidence the Russian Government was involved in the missile strike on MH17 over Ukraine, or interfering in the US election, while he was advocating for a free trade agreement with them.

He also failed to directly implicate the Russian Government in the Salisbury nerve agent attack, stating ambiguously: "How this military grade nerve agent was transported from Russia and released abroad is the key issue here."

It left Ardern to make a number of very clear cut interviews claiming her Government had been "very strong to denounce what has happened here".

"There are very few other options [than Russia being the source of the attack], and this is why we have come out and said, this is repugnant, this is a breach of international law," Ardern said on TVNZ’s Q+A programme.

"Of course from the UK's account there are very few other places that this could have come from. In fact, one. And we have been very strong to denounce what has happened here and so has the Minister for Foreign Affairs."

A similar situation was on the cards last week with Peters refusing to initially express concern over the highly controversial migrant family separations, which have been enforced since May along the US-Mexico border.

However, with President Trump's own change to his administration’s policy to stop the family separations, Peters himself did on Thursday, June 21, say "the coalition government conveyed its concerns to the US Embassy in Wellington yesterday afternoon" over the border protection policy.

The Green's too have been rebellious in their own way, though perhaps with more logic to it, and more discretion.

James Shaw's advice that Kiwis should "eat one less meat meal" to help climate change was probably unhelpful to the economy's largest trade sector - farming. It was a comment that he was quick to clarify in the same interview was not Government policy.

Also, Julie Anne Genter's comment that older white men should vacate their positions on boards was at best an optimistic strategy for increasing diversity.

Of course, all this is not to say Ardern has not had to censure her own party, over phonecalls on planes, and casual, yet planned, yet informal, yet diary-set meetings between Government Ministers and Government-funded radio media executives.

But, Ardern herself is naturally suited to a conciliatory role more than an aggressive one. She puts out fires with broad strokes of a bigger national picture and a refusal to overreact when drawn into a political controversy.

Bridges should take note because if he can have the foresight to take a step back and adopt a pragmatic approach to policy and political debate, he may find some of Jacinda's charismatic restraint rubs off on him over the next month and a half.

* Tom Dillane is a 1 NEWS NOW producer and reporter