One Way Or Another: If National's members discover that their party's caucus is no longer capable of identifying who, in the largest possible measure, possesses the qualities required to lead the National Party to victory, then they will insist on doing the job themselves.
THE NATIONAL PARTY CAUCUS should make Judith Collins Leader
of the Opposition. They should, but they won’t. Like the Labour Party caucus in
2011, the Nats will allow their hearts (or possibly their livers) to over-rule
their heads. They’ll opt for the candidate/s they want – rather than the
candidate their party needs. And, by telling their party to run-along and let
the professionals handle it, they will unleash exactly the same debilitating
internal conflict that kept Labour out of power for 9 years.
Why? Because the only lesson to be learnt from history is
that human-beings are incapable of learning the lessons of history.
Anyone listening to Judith Collins being interviewed by
Guyon Espiner on this morning’s (26/2/18) “Morning Report” couldn’t help but be
impressed.
For a start, she had the gumption to show up in RNZ’s
Auckland studio. Although all five of the candidates vying for the National
Party leadership had been invited, all but Collins declined.
That decision, alone, is enough to disqualify Amy Adams,
Simon Bridges, Steven Joyce and Mark Mitchell from leading a round of applause
– let alone the largest political party in New Zealand.
More impressive, however, was Collins’ ability to express
her thoughts clearly, forcefully, succinctly and with a well-judged measure of
good humour. Unlike Amy Adams, she doesn’t gabble. Nor does her tongue appear
to be engaged in a wrestling-match with every vowel attempting to make it past
her teeth – as is the case with both Simon Bridges and Mark Mitchell.
Only Steven Joyce is competitive with Collins when it comes
to articulateness. Unfortunately, he always sounds as if he’s privy to some
private joke: something about which his listeners know absolutely nothing.
There is about the man a fundamental lack of seriousness which sits very
uneasily with the role he is now seeking to play. Conveying the impression that
the voters are all just hapless players in some vast cosmic comedy may be
acceptable in a highly successful campaign manager – but not in a potential
prime minister.
The other explanation for Collins’ articulateness is that
she actually has something to say. In marked contrast to the torrent of empty
platitudes and/or self-aggrandizing puffery pouring out of the mouths of the
other candidates, Collins talks about politics. Given that she is in a race for
the political leadership of New Zealand, that is both refreshing and
gratifying.
That Collins’ politics is frightening to liberals,
socialists and other harmless living creatures is neither here nor there. Said
socialists and liberals are not her primary audience.
The New Zealanders Collins is speaking for and to are not
the sort to be found in the university common-room – nor yet the
secondary-school staff-room. They are not liberal arts students or aspiring
film-directors. Not many of them will be found on the factory-floor, in the
warehouse, or laying bitumen on the motorway.
Collins supporters are much more likely to be found in
small, owner-operated businesses and family-farms. She will get a good hearing
from women operating in positions of mid-level responsibility: the working
mother who looks after the wages in a medium-sized enterprise; the manager of a
retail outlet employing three or four shop assistants. Men of an authoritarian
temperament (and there are a lot more of those than most people would like to
think) will urge Collins on with lusty cheers.
Most supportive of all, however, will be those wealthy,
hard-core conservatives who bridle at the regulatory “madness” of health-and-safety
legislation; the enterprise-stifling provisions of the Resource Management Act;
and the sheer effrontery of trade unionists and public servants. The sort of
people who know that life under free-market capitalism is a zero-sum game – and
who have no intention of remaining on the losing side for one second longer
than is absolutely necessary.
In short, Collins appeals to the sort of people who have
always made up – and continue to make up – the vast bulk of National Party
support. The sort of people who do not take kindly to having their clearly
expressed preference over-ridden by the ambitious ne’er-do-wells and wannabes
who came to them for the money and behind-the-scenes backing required to secure
a seat in the New Zealand Parliament.
In short, the sort of people who, should they discover that
National’s caucus is no longer capable of identifying who, in the largest
possible measure, possesses the qualities required to lead the National Party
to victory, will insist on doing the job themselves.
This essay was jointly
posted on The Daily Blog and Bowalley
Road of Tuesday, 27 February 2018.
Spot on. Since Collins threw her hat in the ring it reeked of 'cometh the hour, cometh the (wo)man.'
ReplyDeleteAh, but are National MPs thinking "Does he really think Collins is the best person for the job, or is he just saying that because....... " :) I guess we'll find out who it is in a few minutes.
ReplyDeleteSo its the Bridges and Bennett show. Serious mistake but can't help laughing. Even the Nats won't be able to paste over that pair of cracks. What will be interesting is how long before the breakaway club makes its move.
ReplyDeleteHi Chris
ReplyDeleteI'm writing this in the knowledge that Crusher hasn't got the job.
Your comments about each of the candidates are both accurate and wise.
For the last 25 years it's seemed to me that Labour was short of talent. Back in 1999, I thought that Helen Clark actually needed the then Alliance to fill up her front bench with adequate people.
But now it's National which, Crusher apart, seems devoid of talent.
Apparently she was a former member of the Labour Party as recently as 1999. A Waikato girl like Arden and Maraagaret Wilson. A rather poorer farmers daughter than Heln Clark. What I didn't expect about Clark was that she was a little New Zealander, that she was pro farming and country, I would have expected her to hate them. I would never have expected Clark to build up the army and the police. Surely that was all takl. She seemed to have them under control for a while but as they say, when the Kats away the mice play.
ReplyDeleteThere are a number of surpriisng thins about Collins she disliked Canterbury law school which in many ways is very much a social joint for rich girls and boys who like to party from the good schools of Christchurch and the Ni East Coast and first geneation tires of a sort. Judith entered the seirous Nat Party as a candidate for Papakura in 2004/5 and became a noted backer of the unlikely Brash a hardliner on social policies of a simila reacitonary sort to those often favoueed atCanterbury university law school. In office Tolley managed to crush one car, Collins none. What a dissapointment I was expecting mass crushin gof bogan cars going up the road from Gore and Mataura to Queenstown. Significnatly Collins eroded our security and defence forces by demanding the Police become part of the five eyes intelligence gatheringa nd release system. Surely they are not an armed service of the same sort, Paul Buchanan and Fran O'Sullivan hld similar views to me at the time. Collins is a bit like the O'Connor brothers from the coast and probably a dangerous socialist interventionist and uathoritarian . You would be wiser to vote and support a military dictatorship like the one they had in Tunisia, Egypt or chile rather than voting in aCollins government
If your spellin' is anything to go by anonymous 14.43 you're an interesting character. Please assume an identifiable nom de and carry on, like a listless slip on a hill no one has any property rights in.
ReplyDelete