Prime ministers in their prime: how do they perform? How does Mr Luxon match up?
And the "free-speech at uni" debate rolls on.
There’s been much comment lately about Luxon & Co not getting a “honeymoon” as a new government. It pays, then, to look back and compare with how the three previous administrations were polling in their first months.
Labour got 38.7% of the party vote in 1999 and formed a coalition with the Alliance. Labour shot up over 50 in the first three subsequent opinion polls through to the following April. (Polls were less frequent back then.) Despite much opposition over their employment-law and ACC reforms, Labour was having a honeymoon with the public. As preferred PM, Helen Clark was in the high 30s and low 40s. Labour’s party vote rose to 41.3% in 2002, and Clark did nine years as PM.
In 2008, National rode into office on 44.9% of the party vote. Their polling results rose as high as 60 on one occasion, but consistently in low- or mid-50s during April and May 2009. John Key scored above 50 in preferred PM polls. National romped home in the 2011 election with 47.3%, improving on 2008. Key served eight years as PM.
In 2017, Labour got 36.9% of the party vote, behind National’s 44.4%, but Jacinda Ardern formed a coalition government. Labour’s polling soon rose into the low 40s, but lagged behind National in most polls for the following year. Ardern, however, was consistently ahead in preferred PM polls, in the 37–41% range through to May 2018, similar to Clark at the same stage. Ardern’s handling of the mosque shootings and the Covid-19 pandemic boosted Labour’s polling into the 50s by mid-2020, and they won the next election with a resounding 50%.
In the 2023 election, National got 38.1% of the party vote and then formed a three-party coalition government. National’s opinion polling has stalled, however, and lately dropped below 38 (though we need to wait and see if this persists). Luxon’s ahead in preferred PM polling, but only in the low 30s in late 2023, and now down to the mid-20s.
Although I routinely interpret polls with caution, their overall trends, on average, do tell us valid stories, as we can see in hindsight.
Compared to previous administrations, the National Party and its leader as PM are not hitting it off with the public. The “no honeymoon” narrative is valid. Most of National’s post-election opinion polls are below their election result, and Luxon is consistently low as preferred PM. Ideally, they’d be polling over 40, with Luxon at least into the 30s. This doesn’t bode well for their next election. But it’s early days.
Could there be a bigger long-term trend here? Since 2017, I’ve wondered whether New Zealand would follow the example of other proportional-representation systems with “fragmentation” such that no party is getting over 30% in an election, and parties that form governments are having to do so often from a base of less than 25%. They are often hampered by a “pariah” party on the far-right that no centrist or left-wing party wants to work with. Far-right parties are often doing relatively well, though, and you could even say that the former “pariah” parties are now governing Italy.
National’s polling in the 30s is workable only because Labour isn’t doing any better. (Audrey Young’s article on Labour in Thursday’s Herald is worth reading.) As in many other countries, New Zealanders seem to be underwhelmed with political leaders nowadays. Paradoxically, because Kiwis have been less dissatisfied than people in other comparable democracies (yes, there was a survey on this), New Zealand may just be a bit slow in manifesting the polarisation and fragmentation that we see elsewhere. But it’s growing.
Polarisation on campus
The free-speech debate seems to have legs. I was invited on to Radio NZ’s The Panel with Wallace Chapman to discuss free speech (11 minutes in), arising from my recent post. (My comments on The Panel about Green MP Julie-Ann Genter’s behaviour in the debating chamber came before I learned of accusations made by a florist. I now view the matter more seriously.)
Getting back to VUW… A university failing to organise a seminar on freedom of speech is akin to the local cafe failing to organise a flat white. It’s a basic mission failure.
Underlying this is polarisation of opinion about numerous concerns (particularly at present te Tiriti, gender and Gaza) and, more fundamentally, a polarisation of opinion about whether one can openly utter certain opinions about such matters. My view is that the responsible use of free-speech strives to avoid giving offence, but one can’t promise that no one will ever feel offended. One person’s hate speech is another’s common sense, so it’s not possible to “ban hate speech”, because the criteria are, by definition, subjective. Hate is an emotion, after all. An accusation of hate speech may amount to: “I hate to hear that – and I want to silence you”. Nonetheless, we should avoid discrimination and threats.
It was refreshing, in a way, to see some protest action on campus at Auckland University.
This photo was taken with permission. It’s a message board for the pro-Palestine group on campus.
Also noted were some chalked anti-Hamas messages in Albert Park.
This is nothing compared to what’s happening on some American university campuses with pro-Palestine protests, large numbers of arrests, and violence arising from clashes with counter-protestors.
International media are now devoting more space to Americans at elite universities than to the Palestinians themselves who are suffering invasion, bombardment and starvation. Admittedly, Gaza is a very dangerous place for a camera crew or for anyone else right now.
Threat of defamation suit again Winston Peters
Former Australian foreign minister and New South Wales premier, Bob Carr, intends to sue Mr Peters for defamation over a remark made on Radio NZ. (The remark in question has since been deleted from RNZ’s recording of the interview.)
The remark was, in my opinion, personalised, undiplomatic and baseless. Opposition leader Chris Hipkins says Mr Peters should now be stood down. But the PM Christopher Luxon is backing Peters, saying the remark was just part of the rough and tumble of politics. The Chinese government can’t have liked it, though.
The substantive issue is AUKUS Pillar 2. If you don’t know what that is, the best resource I’ve seen comes from the UK House of Commons.
Legal action between a former Australian politician and NZ’s current foreign minister will do nothing to help New Zealanders or Australians. A trial could drag on for some time, putting pressure on Luxon to stand Peters down, and thus seriously weakening the coalition. Or they could try to brazen it out.
You have touched different topics here. I would dare to bring in some thoughts on the second one if I may.
I am curious if you had a chance at this or other occassions to ask students subscribing the chant "From the river to the sea Palestine will he free" (just because it's visible on the board) what do they personally mean by this message or how do they understand it? How would you comment it if asked by the journalists - Is it a free speech or incitement to destroy Israel and annihilate Jewish people, considering what are the river and the sea, as well as official interpretation and reaction to the phrase in many Western countries to date?
Seeing campuses in the United States, those do not look like peaceful and respectful protests in a spirit of free speech. Palestinian supporters among students and affiliated with them abused its freedom To express themselves being physical towards american Jewish students, depriving them (and Jewish professors, at least I have picked up one - Shavi Davidai, active on the X) from the right to attend University, many of students paid tuition fees to attend, denying Jewish freedom From being assaulted... tearing down American flag and putting palestian instead. Would it be tolerated in Aotearoa?
Thinking about freedom to express own emotions and opinions, I have not seen anywhere in the world any signs of aggressive protests by Ukranians nor targeting russians. Instead, russians living in the West are murdering Ukrainians (news from Germany). And that's considering the fact that unlike Gaza, neither Ukriane nor any affiliated armed organisation attacked its neighblour neither in 2014 nor in 2022.
In my opinion, aside of natural support for people who are wronged and suffer, there are hostile Active Measures or state' influence campaigns aiming to disinform, ignite emotions, provoke violence and split societies in the Western countries specifically on the Israeli-Palestinian topic. To be mindful and cautious about this is responsibility of every individual, but especially Universities and governments.
I think, the threat is that malicious actors are happy to use the platform of democratic freedom of speech to abuse it, divide societies and with the help of those sympathetic, neutral or 'bothsidesist' overturn and oppress the opponents. After that is done, they will come after those in the middle grounds. Have not the far Right in the inter-war Germany tailored their speeches and messages depending on the audience's weakest and controversial points, and used platforms of free speech, institutes of democracies, and moderate centrists and its fears to crash the far Left first before turning on those in the center?...
Divide and rule... it's hard to defend against the flood of lies. Overwhelming the defense ultimately forcing it to give up is the aim. Building the defences must be the countermeasures.
Really useful to have some wider context on the coalition government's lack of a 'honeymoon' period. This government - one of the most reactionary administrations we have had under MMP - is as yet to resonate with the wider public. However we are right to be cautious with polls as while they may tell us something about current trends, they do not necessarily say much about the future. Labour's spectacular win in 2020 (and the polling at this time) gave little indication of an almost 50% fall in support 3 years later and that within 2 years Jacinda Adhern would become a polarising figure. It is very much early days.