LIAM HEHIR <\/p>\n
Last updated05:00, March 7 2017 <\/p>\n
CHRIS SKELTON\/FAIRFAX NZ <\/p>\n
Labour leader Andrew Little and his new deputy Jacinda Ardern. <\/p>\n
OPINION: Will Jacinda Arden's accession to the deputy leadership of the Labour Party be the \"game changer\" that has been heralded so often before? <\/p>\n
Ifthe Labour-Green memorandum of understanding, the rise of James Shaw, the retirement of John Key and the Future of Work Commission have not had the prophesied effect, will this be the thing that finally tilts the balance of New Zealand politics away from National? <\/p>\n
Many commentators are excited about the prospect, telling us that Ardern's young, hip image and undeniable media impact will supply Labour with the votes of young Aucklanders in numbers sufficient to make this year's election competitive. <\/p>\n
This is a curious claim given that the new deputy who recently won the substantively uncontested Mt Albert by-election has twice failed to win Auckland Central. <\/p>\n
READ MORE: *Editorial: Annette King a worthy Wellington champion *Stacey Kirk: Mt Albert win gives Jacinda Ardern near unstoppable momentum *Annette King's move from defiance to acceptance boosts Labour's chances <\/p>\n
It's hard to see how Ardern guarantees the votes of young Aucklanders when an Auckland seat held by Labour from 1919 to 2008, which happens to have the highest concentration of young voters in the country, proved beyond her reach. <\/p>\n
But more generally, the case for changes in party leaderships making a material difference in elections seems overblown. <\/p>\n
We often hear that voters are overly influenced by the politics of public relations. There is probably something to this, but it pays to remember the gripes almost always comes from the losing side. While this makes sense (why would the winners complain?), the danger is that blaming the environment is an outlet for those in denial about the real causes of their defeat. <\/p>\n
Rejection is never easy to take, and it may be easier to stomach the idea that the voters are at fault for deciding on the basis personal popularity rather than policy and competence. It's a bipartisan temptation, with ideologues on both Left and the Right being equally apt to blame the herd mentality of the \"sheeple\" for the unpopularity of the agendas. <\/p>\n
In 2001, the National Party caucus despaired of its chances of winning the next election under Jenny Shipley. It deposed her in favour of her recently appointed deputy, Bill English, who had long been touted as a future prime minister. Despite being just 39 years old, English had been in Parliament for 11 years and had even served as minister of finance. <\/p>\n
After becoming leader of the opposition, English's preferred prime minister percentage in the Colmar-Brunton poll climbed strongly before falling and then rising again in the run-up to the 2002 election. While he never came close to matching Helen Clark, his ratings were much better than those achieved by the last four Labour leaders. <\/p>\n
But as far as the National Party's polling went, however, it didn't make much difference. Whatever the trend in the preferred prime minister stakes, National's party vote maintained a consistent downward trajectory. The party went on to receive less than 21 per centin the general election. <\/p>\n
In recent years, John Key's personal style has been cited as an example of PR vapidity triumphing over substance. However, it is pretty clear that his government's popularity was more stable than his personal popularity. <\/p>\n
After becoming prime minister, through to the 2014 election, Key's preferred prime minister rating was very rarely less than 50 per cent, with it exceeding more than 70 per cent at times. Prior to his resignation last year, however, the ceiling for his rating was lower than 40 per cent. <\/p>\n
And yet through that decline, National's polling proved resilient. It certainly did not go through anything like the same decline. <\/p>\n
But in any event, Ardern is not the leader of the Labour Party. She has become Andrew Little's deputy. If the actual leader only has a marginal impact in most cases, a deputy leader's impact will be smaller by several orders of magnitude. <\/p>\n
Ardern was a high-profile member of the Opposition before acceding to the deputy leadership and it's hard to see what her new position adds to that. Against that, the manner and timing of her promotion have had two very certain outcomes. <\/p>\n
First, now former deputy Annette King will retire from Parliament. This means Labour will lose an MP with experience of actually being in power, who has the respect of the other side of the aisle and who is widely admired in the provinces. For all the handwringing about the need for renewal, her retirement is not a good thing for Labour. <\/p>\n
Secondly, assuming she wants the job, Ardern will become leader if Andrew Little fails to topple National in September. <\/p>\n
Until now, he probably would have survived a narrow loss, as many leaders of the Opposition have done before him. Now, all the momentum is with Ardern and, like Bill English in 2001, the pressure will be on for her to complete what many have considered to be her destiny ever since she first arrived in Parliament back in 2008. <\/p>\n
-Stuff <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
See original here:<\/p>\n
Ardern ascension, King exit, barely balances ledger for Labour - The Press West Coast<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" LIAM HEHIR Last updated05:00, March 7 2017 CHRIS SKELTON\/FAIRFAX NZ Labour leader Andrew Little and his new deputy Jacinda Ardern. Continue reading