I like MPs who do worthwhile things for those with little influence

The theatre of politics can be enticing unless, like a great many people busy making their lives and whānau, you never really connect with it. Or, like more than a few I know, you get drawn in as you might to a bad reality television show, then get slowly sickened and give it up (with the occasional sneaky catch-up, of course).

Parliament I think of as the puppet end of the theatre scene. There is quite a bit of childish behaviour, it is highly ritualised and repetitive, and there is often someone pulling the strings off stage. It’s just a pity we use it to make our laws. Or pretend to.

Some of that pretence is unmasked when a governing party or parties feel a need for urgency. That in itself is an odd word to use. There is nothing “urgent” about much of what has been rushed through Parliament recently. The coalition may feel some degree of urgency but that is political incontinence on their part, rather than genuine need to make any of the legislative changes within a swift timeframe.

I know that participants, from MPs to their staff to public servants, will mutter about the “real” work done in select committees and in painstaking policy and legislative development in ministries. That is true enough though if you take select committee hearings as any evidence they mostly present as the parliamentary equivalent of pre-season matches in professional sport. They might help to iron out some technical issues and give fringe team members a run, but they don’t much impact the final league table.

This is not to belittle MPs. I support many of them. Not because of their universal selfless devotion to the public good all working together. Quite the opposite, the ones I support and like are fiercely partisan and motivated not to serve King Charles and his offspring but to do worthwhile things for those with too little influence and stop those with too much influence doing harmful things to the same people. It is hard and often demotivating work, especially when not infrequently others they may have thought shared those aims turn out to be puppets for some other interest.

The predominant influence is from those with the greatest financial and economic strength, and the professional elites which work with them. These drive the concepts and models of behaviour which reinforce their out-sized influence. They set the stage and write the music and lyrics which influence our lives. This is not conspiracy, simply the workings of interests and influence in human society. (Which is not to say there are no conspiracies). The playing out of influence has distinct winners and losers.

I use the term “influence” here because it is quite a different thing to “power”. I was struck by how Chlöe Swarbrick has been speaking recently about how real power rests with people who mostly do not realise they have power and that a political leader’s role is to foster that realisation, and work to make it effective.

I think she is right about that and it defines the difference between a “politician” and a “political leader”. A “leader” is not someone who tells others what they have to do. A “leader” draws out the power of others to act.

At a much larger scale a leader like Nelson Mandela realised that. “Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure”. Especially together. The stronger the community links and self-belief the stronger any leader is who genuinely represents them.

When I look at our “House of Representatives”, I’m pretty clear that many actually represent vested interests more than real communities. Or they are coat-tailing on some political meme that such interests have funded to electoral success.

What we need, those of us who seek equity and community prosperity, is leadership which encourages and empowers our communities who are on the wrong end of current influence. Build their community self-belief and confidence and that of the people who make them up. I think this is what Chlöe means when she talks of politics being too important to be left to politicians. We have to get past the idea that politics is about who we allow to dictate our lives, even if it is on a relatively short-term leash.

I think we can see this happening amongst Māori, with iwi and hapu focus on what they can assert and deliver for themselves. The more positive community activism we see the better from this point of view. There is a gap between the sort of lives and environments most people want, the sort which is consistent with their genuine interests, and what occupies stage at the Molesworth Street Theatre. If those on the wrong end of influence allow that gap to exist it will be, has been, and is filled by those on the winning end.

Rob Campbell CNZM has an extensive background in trade unionism, business leadership, governance and public service. He is chancellor of AUT, and the chair of Ara Ake and NZ Rural Land.

What we need is leadership which encourages and empowers our communities who are on the wrong end of current influence.