THE KEY . . . GOOD MANNERS, CIVILITY & RESPECT FOR THE LAW

This Government is getting a reputation for arrogance and bad manners. The graceless comments by its leader when National Party leader, Don Brash, announced his retirement, was only matched by the refusal to congratulate Jenny Shipley, who became the first women Prime Minister. Civility and grace were once respected attributes of leadership, they reflected the natural humility, honour and humour of New Zealanders. Muldoon also broke these unwritten rules with his bullying and menace. Now we have a Prime Minister who rings local body politicians to get the numbers for their stadium vision in Auckland. By the time this is published, they could well have somersaulted. Trevor Mallard is used as the ‘canary down the coal mine’ by the Prime Minister and it will be dismissed as another of Trevor’s mind-farts. They have claimed that the special legislation to advance their uncosted “transformational” vision of the stadium is just what I did with the America’s Cup project, that is Orwellian in its deceit. What they propose is almost the mirror opposite of the America’s Cup legislation. If you oppose them, you have no vision. Where’s the money coming from? A special tax – we have money in the bank, let’s spend it and make an offer they, the local politicians, can’t refuse. Touch of the Mafia here. If you don’t agree, we will take the Cup to Christchurch (a threat that will be forgotten), oh, and if you don’t behave during Guy Fawkes, we will take your fireworks off you too.

To sit idle for a couple of years, and then to give Auckland two weeks to agree, is a scandal in itself. We introduced the America’s Cup legislation before we even won the event. Local government was consulted and agreed it did not take away planning and local rights, but simply moved these hurdles closer together. Even Geoffrey Palmer, who lead a righteous charge against Muldoon’s fast-track think-big Clyde Dam, legislation supported this process. Labour’s political skills are stunning. Why are we so good at this? Perhaps because we practice on each other.

Can John Key make it? I hope he’s never double-parked, or touched himself in the shower. The blowtorch will go on him.

His is an interesting narrative, a state house boy from my old electorate, who’s made a few million dollars. He needs to widen himself and reach out to middle New Zealand. I understand he has studied the strategies of David Cameron, the new Conservative leader in Britain, who has the media and the Conservative Party in raptures when he exclaims, “I quite like trees.” Cameron has even praised public servants and public health. U.K. Conservatives have set up policy commissions on all sorts of subjects and invited opponents, like Bob Geldorf, to join. Hell, they even invited me to be a member.

This has given them space and a process to convince the centre they are born again and reflect the modern world. Labour was successful when we became “business friendly” and convinced the centre we could be trusted with their money. National has to convince the people they can be trusted with our social assets, the environment, education, public health, and our generous social safety net. There are good reasons why Labour should be returned, it’s been financially prudent except when behind in the polls, but they are risk and reform adverse, probably the most conservative government since the long-term Holyoake Government. They are capable of savage reversal depending on the political wind. Look at how the carbon tax was dropped like a hot turd. Billion dollar mistakes on climate change costs, policy dropped, then it’s all on again. Remember how students had their interest payments abolished, a promise to end all Treaty claims within a set period, and to stop all programmes that were race-based. All this printed on a plastic pledge card, all of this in contradiction to earlier promises, all done within 6 weeks of an election!

What would be good for New Zealand and good politics is if they promised to individualise the Cullen fund for retirement, topped up each account with a portion of the surplus, then abolish many of the Family Support schemes where the bureaucratic costs are so high, and offered major tax cuts for each child regardless of race or income. This would put a ‘right hook’ under John Key’s vulnerable chin, who will be left gasping as he will be painted as a proponent of tax cuts for the rich, not children. Then Labour can say, like Muldoon once said, “I’ve spent the lot,” claim to be “family-friendly” and support hard working New Zealanders. By the way, this policy also makes economic and social sense, which I hope still matters.