Comment: Somewhere, an election season billboard designer is breathing a sigh of relief.
There’ll be no need to digitally remove Christopher Luxon from National’s streetside campaign signs, as happened with Andrew Little nine years ago when Jacinda Ardern ascended to Labour’s leadership.
Luxon has, remarkably, stared down a second successive caucus ferment in four months to emerge with the apparent confidence of National’s MPs to lead them to the November 7 election. He describes it as “the full support” of his caucus.
There will be no Ericamania, for now. Any hope that a late change and a charismatic candidate could kickstart National up into the mid-30s in the polls is extinguished. And there will be no Bishop replacing the King on National’s unstable chessboard.
It’s back on the shoulders of Christopher Mark Luxon, aged 55, the incumbent chief executive of the country, to try to drive National’s party vote high enough to a) form a centre-right coalition again and b) not be further squeezed by the political python NZ First.
Why did he win the day? Only the caucus members know whether loyalty or fear of the unknown swayed their deliberations. Most likely both, plus a deep stubbornness to ensure the New Zealand public appreciate the National Party’s efforts to set up the promised land of recovery.
Wednesday’s urgent three-hour caucus meeting is a battle won for Luxon. But the war is another thing. Try as he might for 32 months, he has been unable to inspire likeability or relatability with the electorate. His party, which he united to achieve 38.08 percent in 2023 is holding onto 30 by its fingertips with 87 days to go. A new 1News poll is due tonight, and might well have inspired hope if preliminary results somehow were known to the MPs.
The war will also be evident in how the scarred leader deals with those who might have agitated against him. He has already tried the stick of portfolio demotions, with Chris Bishop’s punishment in April.
The question now is how to convince the electorate that this National Cabinet, let alone caucus, is united enough to deserve their vote.
In all likelihood, Luxon is not strengthened in the voters’ minds by his colleagues stepping back from the brink. In any orthodox political scenario a twice-challenged leader is weakened. With apologies to physicists, each time the tide comes in, it comes further up the beach.
But a further confidence vote before the campaign is unthinkable; only an acceptance by the self-confident Luxon himself that he should go could now deliver a leadership change.
At this point, Act seems the most stable element of the coalition. NZ First is doing its election year thing, laying political landmines for friends and foes – and attention-seeking.
Winston Peters is unlikely to offer Luxon, the survivor, any further water rings to stay afloat. It’s not in the NZ First leader’s make-up to take pity on his former party.
Luxon’s short-term success at the caucus is historic. Calling two urgent discussions on your leadership in four months during election year writes its own chapter in the history of New Zealand leaders. It writes its own chapter in the books from the business self-help genre that Luxon frequently seems to quote.
Nicola Willis stood clear of all this fallout and could, medium-term, end up being the beneficiary of Luxon’s fragile hold on the reins and her colleagues’ opprobrium directed at Stanford and Bishop.
Meanwhile the Labour Party, with its own ‘rogue poll’ result a week ago putting it back in the 20s, will be hoping National’s instability can be held in bright blue contrast to the solid inter-personal discipline leader Chris Hipkins has managed this term.
National, NZ First and Act will turn the heat on Labour’s economic policies, and on its 2020-23 record in government, but they are unlikely to get a rise from Labour MPs from baiting them over unity or Hipkins’ continued leadership.
The critical factors in the election still seem to be whether Te Pāti Māori goes for, and succeeds with, a one-tick electorate vote strategy to win physical seats and create an overhang in Parliament, and whether the Opportunity party can really get over the 5 percent threshold.
Neither of those factors seem to be easily influenceable by Luxon, Mark III.
It’s arguable that people considering Opportunity are not doing so for its universal basic income policy or land tax, or for being left or right, but because they see it as an alternative to … New Zealand First having the sole role of kingmaker between parties.
Luxon ruled out working with Opportunity, but if the people don’t believe him on that and keep that party as a likely player, its ultimate role is unpredictable. Hurting Labour’s party vote, maybe, but possibly assisting a Labour-led coalition – or, in spite of Luxon, offering him an alternative to working again with Peters.
