With family jetting off to far-flung places for Christmas this year a pre-Christmas get together was held.
It was the usual family affair, rather light-hearted and full of off-colour jokes until we got around to talking about this dreadful government.
It was at this point my long-suffering father intoned that we could see a change of government next year. I spat my third helping of strawberries soaked in cream and icing sugar out all over the silver cutlery.
The dear old thing is so enamoured with his beloved National party that all sense has departed.
I asked him a number of questions all of which were met by the bewildered stare that old people get when they’ve said something but can’t quite remember what it was or if it was rude.
I asked “What is National’s path to victory? Silence.
What was Simon Bridges’ path to victory? Apparently that is yet to be determined. I thought that it was rather careless of Simon Bridges to be leader yet not have elucidated his path to victory to one of his most loyal followers.
And then I remembered the video above and what Tony Blair has said about the recent election in the UK. Blair states:
“No sentient political party goes into an election with the leader who has net approval rating that is minus 40%”
A credible opposition is essential for democracy. While the voters think that National is a credible opposition, it’s just that they don’t think Simon Bridges should or can lead them.
This, of course, is different from what caucus thinks, and again one must paraphrase Tony Blair, the caucus is marooned on Fantasy Island if they think a leader with a subterranean net approval rating will guide them on a path to victory.
My ears were flapping the other day when at a wine bar in central Auckland I heard some key NZ First people talking about how great it will be negotiating with Simon Bridges after the election. Half thought he’d balls up the negotiations like Bill English, the other half were talking about how they would make him park Paula Bennett, Anne Tolley, David Carter and Nick Smith in the furthest reaches of the house never to be seen or heard from again. Such would be the price of regaining the treasury benches, a price they believe Bridges would happily pay to have PM after his name.
Now, dear readers, nay loyal party members, think about this for a moment. Your party, and that of my dear old pa, is being led by a leader that not only the public has little time for, but someone who the opposition parties think is so weak that he’d be a better option than going with Labour and Jacinda Ardern again. Not only that, they believe he’d be so craven as to cast aside his most loyal supporters for a shot at the big chair.
If you are a true believer, two ticks blue and all that then I have a challenge for you. Go and attend National Party events, especially those with dear Simon Bridges in attendance and ask the question, “If Labour are as bad as you say they are why aren’t you 20% ahead in the polls?”
Then follow that up with “What makes you think that you can achieve a single-party majority under MMP which John Key failed to achieve despite record popularity?” and “What makes you think you can deliver that which has never been delivered, ever, in any parliamentary democracy that has MMP, a single party getting more than 50% of the vote?’
I respectfully suggest that you will be met with an uncomfortable silence, especially if the person attempting to answer those questions has a net approval rating approaching minus 35.
So, I repeat what I said to my poor bewildered father, What is National’s credible path to victory?
