Prime Minister hobbled by her coalition hand
Is Jacinda Ardern a weak prime minister? Yes, in the sense that her ability to personally lead a Government with purpose appears to be limited. Winston Peters and Co have made this painfully clear over the past three months. The prime minister gave a big speech on Sunday. The hype was that this address would signal a return to form for her premiership but it seems to have been stuffed with platitudes and little else. This also speaks to a certain weakness.
But does this mean Ardern is a weak leader personally? Not necessarily: weakness of position is not the same thing as weak leadership.
It’s not fair to judge a poker player on the cards they have been dealt. We can, of course, judge the player on how well she plays those cards. And a skilled player makes the best of the hand she is dealt. Understanding probability, knowing how to bluff and being able to read other players all help.
However, ultimately, there is only so much you can do with a pair of fours.
We don’t know how Ardern would be going in a landscape like the one Helen Clark moved around in back in 2000. Nor do we know how John Key would have fared had he depended on two strong coalition partners in 2009, either. The terrain Ardern must navigate seems much rougher.
Right from the outset, her Government depends on Winston Peters. Marriage with NZ First is usually the refuge of tired governments. Jim Bolger had two terms as prime minister under his belt before tying the knot. Ditto for Helen Clark.
Neither found their political longevity enhanced as a result and Ardern must balance her coalition partner against the needs of the Green Party. For the time being, she is helped by the compliant attitude of its MPS and their natural sympathy for her.
However, we can’t assume the Greens will be willing to be pushed around forever.
The Greens gave confidence and supply to Clark too, remember. It didn’t stop them from causing her Government real trouble over genetic modification. It wouldn’t be surprising for that activist spirit to re-emerge.
Even if the docility continues, it comes with its own risks. The subordination of Green priorities and principles may demoralise its stalwart voters. With the party hovering just above 5 per cent in the polls, that could be disastrous for the coalition.
On the other side of the debating chamber, Ardern faces an Opposition united like no other in the history of MMP.
This may seem like an odd thing to say after the Simon Bridges travel expenses leak. We will never know if the leaker was a disgruntled National MP since speaker of the House Trevor Mallard has suppressed the investigation. However, for all we know, it certainly could have been.
Nevertheless, there is no escaping the fact that National is the only Opposition party of significance, assuming we don’t accord much significance to ACT.
When Labour was in Opposition, it had to jockey for position with NZ First and the Greens. As it tried to hold National to account, it had to fend off its smaller rivals. Flagship policies like the capital gains tax and an increased superannuation age were rebuffed by Peters. Metiria Turei’s big speech on welfare last year caught Labour flatfooted and left it dazed.
National doesn’t suffer that disability. If you want to know what the Opposition position on the Government is, there is no doubt about who to go to. That affords the opposition the potential for cohesion the Government can’t match.
Finally, the Government is not confronted by any external crisis. Consider the opportunities that problems create: it gives a Government excuses the public will buy; it allows a leader to steamroll objections on the basis of emergency.
Instead, Ardern has inherited a fundamentally sound economy. That’s good for the country, but tricky for the prime minister. If we slip into decline, her Government will be blamed – fairly or not.
How would Bill English have gone in the same situation? Again, that is not something we are given to know. It was never on the cards for the former prime minister.
That’s not to say the situation wouldn’t have been difficult for National had Peters selected it instead of Labour. God only knows what concessions the party was willing to make for another three years in Government. A lot of what National condemns now it would be defending, one suspects.
Ardern is in office but not, it seems, in power. By any fair reckoning, that is a difficult hand to play. The prime minister hasn’t folded yet.
It will be interesting to see what happens if it ever comes to a showdown.