The Second Coming?

Jacinda Ardern’s legacy now depends on victory in the war against Covid-19. International experience tells us we should be pessimistic. While New Zealand may have one of the lowest mortality rates and an ‘effective reproduction rate’ of only 0.48, we know that ‘elimination’ cannot be permanent without a vaccine. Further outbreaks are almost inevitable. But a national lockdown at ‘Level 4’ was never a long-term solution. At some point, we may find that the economic consequences and social harm of elimination will prove too much for New Zealanders. Unemployment is already forecast to reach double figures. While there is a lot of goodwill and support for the government’s approach now, at some point this is going to subside. Ardern cannot shelter us all from the harsh realities of life forever.

It is likely that breaking-point will be reached before the 19 September election. If so, the Labour Party needs to rely on more than ‘kindness’ and Ardern’s status as a progressive icon. Before the pandemic, opinion polling suggested that the Labour/NZ First Coalition was on course to be the country’s first one-term government since 1975. Ardern’s popularity notwithstanding, more New Zealanders preferred the National Party of Simon Bridges to the Coalition. These circumstances welcomed comparison with the Third Labour Government of Norman Kirk and Wallace ‘Bill’ Rowling. But this analogy was rejected by some, who recall that the larger-than-life Kirk died more than a year out from the 1975 election. Had he lived, conventional wisdom says, Labour would have been re-elected. In fact, the National Party was polling neck-and-neck with Labour on the eve of Kirk’s death. The economy was out of control: unemployment had reached levels not seen in a generation, while inflation also began to soar. Robert Muldoon, the new Opposition leader, promised to ‘rebuild’ the country. His message was compelling even under the glow of Kirk.

But that was a different time and place; much like February 2020. Pundits now anticipate a Labour landslide in September. Ardern’s leadership during the pandemic has added a new gloss to ‘Jacindamania’. Her appeal is even stronger than before with both the Reid Research/Newshub and UMR polls confirming what many believed. New Zealanders are rallying around the Prime Minister and her party. In political science this is called the “rally ‘round the flag effect” and is most commonly associated with wartime, but can be observed during any major national crisis. The most obvious recent example from New Zealand is the poll bounce Labour received after the Christchurch mosque shootings. By the end of the year, party support had returned to ‘normal’. It is likely that we will see this pattern again in the next few months. While Bridges did cop a lot of flack for criticising the government recently, the social and economic effects of lockdown are yet to be felt by most people. 

In the end it doesn’t matter that Bridges lacks charisma and has a propensity to stumble. Many would have said the same about Jim Bolger during the ‘90s. The polling makes clear that National supporters feel more attached to the party than they do the leader. Otherwise, National’s support would be even lower than 30%. Recall how conventional wisdom said English was sure to preside over a catastrophic defeat in 2017; when, in fact, he brought National within a hair’s breadth of victory and kept the dream alive for several weeks. The man who “specialised in boring” probably did no worse than his predecessor might have. If National is cohesive and on message, come September,  it won’t matter who the leader is. By contrast, Labour needs to hope that the gloss of Jacindamania doesn’t wear off. While Ardern’s leadership qualities are rare and impressive, there are some political realities that even she cannot overcome. 

First, there would be no ‘Labour’ government without NZ First and the Greens. It is plausible that Labour will be in a position to govern without one of these parties in 2020. However, the belief that Labour can win an absolute majority is fanciful under MMP. New Zealanders haven’t elected a one party majority government since 1990. Not even Key - whose approval ratings peaked at 81% during his first term - could pull off that feat. A few months out from the 2011 general election, National averaged 54 percent in opinion polls. On election night it still came up three seats short of a majority. There remains strong support for the Greens and NZ First, though both will have to fight for their survival. Second, there is a complex interplay of variables determining how each person will vote. This would be impossible to unpack and means a degree of unpredictability. Anyone claiming to know what the ‘average voter’ thinks or feels is likely to be wrong many times over. A large body of political science literature tells us that economic and material concerns usually predominate at election time. But in recent years, we have seen the increasing salience of postmaterialist or cultural issues; the most obvious example being debate around ‘identity politics’. We cannot dismiss the importance of either dimension. 

Ardern’s remarkable rise to power in 2017 looked almost transcendent. Within three months of becoming Opposition leader, she was the Prime Minister. Her success can be attributed to a number of factors but one stands out above the rest. It was her ability to inspire; to renew faith in a cause that most had given up on. When Andrew Little resigned on 1 August, few could have imagined the religious-like fervour that would erupt at the Auckland Town Hall when Labour officially launched its campaign a few weeks later. In a powerful speech, Ardern outlined her agenda for transformational leadership. Labour would end child poverty and take meaningful action on climate change (“our generation’s nuclear free moment”). It met with rapturous applause from the thousands gathered. The energy of that speech would resurrect Labour from near-death and make Ardern one of the most powerful women in the world.

In office, Ardern has not come even close to realising her ambition for ‘transformative change’. Difficult social problems like child poverty and homelessness will not be solved by rhetoric. Only the most partisan would deny that not much has changed under the Coalition. The decision to rule out a capital gains tax and shy away from welfare reform has only reinforced a perception that talk of kindness is mere ‘virtue signalling’. National rightly argues that Labour over-promised and under-delivered. Even more problematic for Labour is the fact that National probably did just as much to ‘help’ the poor when it was in government. As the country fights Covid-19, a patriotic desire for unity has buried these issues in the public consciousness. But they haven’t gone away. As the negative effects of the lockdown begin to be felt, economic inequality and social justice will come back into focus. It is by no means certain that Labour is in a position to deal with the fallout.

It will be tempting for Labour strategists to dismiss this argument under the effervescent glow of their leader. The ‘halo effect’ alone could be enough to overcome any negativity. Indeed, this may be true if one is concerned only with maximising the party vote. As 2017 proved, however, the largest party has no constitutional claim to power. It would be a great irony of New Zealand political history if Labour were to reverse places with National. That is why Ardern and Labour must not take the centre-left bloc or an absolute majority for granted. This is particularly true for NZ First. Although Bridges has formally ruled out working with Winston Peters’ party, it is not inconceivable that this position could be renegotiated in a post-pandemic environment. In fact National and NZ First appear to have found common ground in their scepticism of the government’s elimination strategy (what some on the left call ‘death cult capitalism’). The two parties could yet put aside their differences in the ‘national interest’.

But the more pressing concern for NZ First is political survival. With the party languishing below 5 percent, it may need to win an electorate seat. Until now Peters has dogmatically ruled out any Epsom-style deal. This makes sense given his repeated criticisms of the ‘coat-tail’ rule that has seen ACT and UnitedFuture remain relevant in the past. Even if Labour were to countenance such a deal, it is unlikely that Peters would accept one. Most likely NZ First will seek to maximise the party vote by differentiating itself from both Labour and National while attempting to play its substantially-weakened hand as king/queenmaker.  However, the party must also overcome serious fraud allegations related to fundraising. If the SFO were to lay charges against Peters’ associates then it could very well prove fatal. Labour will need to weigh up how much of a risk it is prepared to take on NZ First. 

That leaves the Green Party. Recent media reports suggest that the burden of office has revealed deep-seated ideological divisions within the party. The tension is between those on the left, who are frustrated by a lack of real progress in government, and the party’s liberal centrist wing that is content with gradual change and a more transactional approach to politics. Arguably it is the latter that has proved more electorally successful. But that does raise the question: what is the point of the Green Party? If it is simply to keep Labour in power, then the liberal centrists may be vindicated. If the Greens’ purpose is to bring about radical progressive change, then they have failed in this term of Parliament. One thing is clear: Labour cannot win without them.

In fact, the conflict within the Greens is nothing new. Nor is the problem confined to one party. It has held the left back for a decade. But if Ardern is serious about inequality and climate change, then 2020 is her last opportunity to do something. These issues will endure long after the pandemic and true victory against Covid-19 will ultimately depend on the kind of post-pandemic society we construct. In the end, transformative change is most likely to come from a Labour/Green electoral bloc of which Ardern is the figurehead. Only someone with her empathy and judgement could reconcile the liberal centre with the radical left into a coherent political programme that is likely to receive broad support at the ballot box. She could even leave the door open to Peters.

Josh Van Veen