Peter MacDonald
Jacinda Ardern is being touted by media sources as the next UN Secretary General when Antonio Guterres, the current secretary general from Portugal, leaves office in January 2027. Her rise in international politics has been carefully curated: aided by a New Zealand media that fawned over her every move during her six years as prime minister, particularly over her Covid mandates and lockdowns, which polarised New Zealand and left the nation in a divided wake.
Ardern’s ascent began with her socialist leanings at university, continued through the UN Youth Socialist Leader programme and the WEF Young Global Leaders initiative. She also benefitted from exposure to Tony Blair’s Fabian socialist “Third Way” policies. The Blairite approach sought to reconcile traditional left-wing social justice goals with a pragmatic embrace of market economics, emphasising modernising government, investing in public services and promoting equality of opportunity, all within a framework of partnerships between the state, private sector, and civil society. Ardern attempted to implement these principles in New Zealand, but many of her flagship policies failed spectacularly – programmes such as KiwiBuild, mental health initiatives, child poverty efforts, Auckland light rail and others largely under-delivered or were abandoned.
In my opinion, this is not real leadership. These are templates arising from Fabian socialist agendas, driven into party politics. They are experiments, not genuinely thought-out policies. All of these initiatives failed, at the cost of billions, adding to the now NZ$180 billion debt hole she left in New Zealand.
Her trajectory, in my view, has followed a structured, internationally recognised path. Her handling of New Zealand’s Covid response drew international attention, with some global leaders and institutions viewing it favourably, which has contributed to her rising profile on the world stage and positioned her as a potential candidate for leading global initiatives like the UN climate and social agendas. This ascent through structured, globally directed, systems from university socialist movements to UN youth programmes, WEF recognition and exposure to Blairite Fabian policies demonstrates a clearly defined path aligning with the expectations of international observers.
While internationally she is celebrated as a compassionate and visionary leader (due to NZ’s MSM supporting her narrative), being praised by figures such as Keir Starmer, King Charles and Prince William, and being involved with Prince William’s Earthshot Prize, her domestic record tells a different story. New Zealand’s Treasury estimates the Labour-led coalition spent approximately NZ$66 billion, nearly 20 per cent of GDP on Covid-19 response measures, including health interventions, vaccine mandates, lockdowns, wage subsidies and broader economic stimuli. While initially helpful in preventing a severe economic downturn, much of this spending extended beyond immediate pandemic needs, contributing to rising inflation and long-term public debt. Some estimates place total outlays between NZ$62 billion and NZ$71 billion, leaving New Zealand with an enormous debt burden.
If Ardern does secure the UN Secretary General role, she will be tasked with leading the UN’s ambitious global climate emergency agenda into the 2030s and beyond. Guterres has outlined that the UN is establishing a US$1.5 trillion global climate fund, operational by 2035, to provide payments to developing countries, including nations such as Jamaica and other countries of a similar socioeconomic standing, to offset climate impacts largely attributed to emissions from first-world countries, including New Zealand. This means New Zealand will be paying into a UN administered climate fund, supplementing the US$1.5 trillion, with millions annually by 2035. Ardern’s established profile as a climate advocate, coupled with her perceived competent management of Covid-19 here in NZ, positions her as a strong candidate to implement the UN climate agenda beyond the 2030s.
Yet, domestically, many New Zealanders will view this rise with dismay, seeing her as a figure whose international acclaim contrasts starkly with the mixed outcomes and significant costs of her six-year leadership.
