It might be hard to stay positive
Sorry, but the fun’s over. Politics is back. The Ra¯ tana setpiece in late January traditionally marks the start of the political year. For Labour, it was preceded by a two-day party retreat in Martinborough that looked like a mix of holiday camp and serious political planning.
It was at Martinborough that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern did her best to set a steady, moral tone for what could be a tumultuous election year. And in doing so, she reminded politics watchers of the persona that won over voters in 2017.
Two TV moments during that campaign clearly defined the Ardern style as she challenged Bill English for the top job. The first was a confrontation with a breakfast show co-host over his assumptions about working mothers. Her assertiveness persuaded viewers who wondered if she had the steel to lead.
The second is less well-remembered but equally important. She and English were asked during a leaders’ debate if it is possible to survive in politics without lying. Ardern replied, ‘‘I believe that it is possible to exist in politics without lying and by telling the truth.’’
The real answer should have been ‘‘of course not’’, and everyone watching knew that, but Ardern’s answer was truthful in at least one way. It told us everything about the kind of politician she wanted the world to see and, at her best, as in her response to the Christchurch terror attacks, it is the politician the world did see.
The line was obviously aspirational, rather than reflecting a goal that is easily possible. It was about values rather than the compromises and grubby realities of politics. Yet it says much about the resilience of Ardern’s brand that she could make a similar claim in 2020 and still be taken seriously.
Indeed, in 2020, Ardern promises to avoid ‘‘negative fake news’’ campaigns and has signed up to Facebook’s transparency rules. Facebook’s Ad Library Report allows users to see who parties target and how much they spend on Facebook. Signing up is compulsory in the UK and US, but optional here. Both ACT and the Green Party will also use it, whereas National has still not committed.
Importantly, the transparency tool does not test the truth of political ads, but allows the public to assess their reach. It is not a fact-checking service. But its adoption by Labour fits neatly with New Zealand’s global reputation for political transparency. It was purely coincidental that Transparency International’s finding that New Zealand and Denmark are the two least corrupt countries came out in the same week.
It could be said that Labour is using honesty and transparency as a strategy, hoping to remind voters of dirtier campaigns elsewhere, such as Australia in 2019. Pundits have also noticed a discrepancy in National’s recent approach, with leader Simon Bridges appearing to run two campaigns at once. One takes a positive, middle-of-the-road approach while the other tries to use law and order populism to box NZ First into a corner.
Bridges has become a more aggressive politician in the past year, and his leadership looks safe until the election at least, but at the same time, he has become less likeable. If this is a strategy, it is a risky one.
Yet an election year that will feature divisive referendums on cannabis and euthanasia will be a less predictable one than usual. Promises to be relentlessly positive and open in January may not mean much in September or October.
It could be said Labour is using transparency as a strategy.