Lusk seen as partner in grime
This is no Tea Party-type takeover of the National party. Their underhand tactics have had much more impact on Labour.
IF CAMERON Slater is the baddest dude in New Zealand politics, then Simon Lusk is his partner in crime. Or puppet master, depending on your reading of Nicky Hager’s latest book Dirty Politics.
Like Dick Dastardly and Muttley, the pair have snickered their way through their own various political plots. Crude, cruel and often offensive, their online chats were laid bare last week by Hager’s source, an anonymous hacker who has identified himself to the Sunday Star-Times as ‘‘Rawshark’’.
Until recently, Hawke’s Bay-based Lusk was as much of an enigma as the hacker. He almost never gives interviews. The names of his clients might have leaked out, but he never confirms them.
Lusk has long been painted as shadowy bagman with an ultra-conservative agenda. National’s hierarchy issued a warning to candidates in 2012 not to use his political strategy services. Campaign supremo Steven Joyce is not a fan. Those close to Lusk report that the feeling is mutual.
His success in elections is the subject of legend, but so far publicly unverified. Hager’s book claims Lusk and Slater were instrumental in installing National MP Mark Mitchell in Rodney in 2011, mainly by attacking rivals and talking up his career with the police. No-one disputes that his candidates are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars for his advice.
Taciturn and occasionally prickly, his personality is at the other end of the spectrum from John Key’s. Neither do they share political views. Lusk is hard-right. Key knows electoral success depends on the centre. Lusk does not have his ear. Sources also say he isn’t a confidante of justice minister Judith Collins in the same way that Slater is.
There is a danger his – and Slater’s – influence on the party has been wildly overegged. This is no Tea Party-type takeover of the National party. Their underhand tactics have had much more impact on Labour.
But, with the publication of their stolen correspondence, Slater and Lusk have disrupted National’s election campaign on a far grander scale than they could ever have imagined. The party’s election strategists are deeply worried another dirty politics bombshell will wreck their carefully orchestrated launch in South Auckland today. The optics will certainly be spoiled, but the wider public almost certainly cares more about the populist policy National will pitch.
Long term, Lusk and Slater’s manoeuvring will have most effect on their Beehive allies, Collins and spin doctor Jason Ede. Almost everyone in the political sphere assumes Collins will be demoted post-election. With exposure, Ede’s black-op tactics are rendered ineffectual – and he and Slater appear to have fallen out. Key’s relationship with the media has also sustained a further blow.
Aside from the gross invasion of their privacy and the (likely short-term) impact on Slater’s advertising, the dastardly duo are unscathed and unabashed. Lusk has gained a new client – an unnamed Auckland mayoralty hopeful. Whaleoil’s hits have gone through the roof – the scandal ensured his blog is a must-read for his supporters and detractors. Nor has there been any noticeable letup in dirty tactics. In the fever of the election campaign, rumours and scuttlebutt are flying as much as they have always done.