Cautious campaign behind big win

THE LONG VIEW - RICHARD LONG

Don't blame Helen Clark. Don't blame Mike Williams. Don't blame the attack adverts and Labour's personal attack tactics.

There is no need for Labour, like the defeated Republicans in America, to go through the finger-pointing blame exercise. Its loss was practically preordained. It was a victim of third-termitis.

Technically, Miss Clark's Government should have fallen at the last election in 2005, as the polls indicated at the time. National's vote surged 20 per cent then, but Labour made an election eve recovery, to retain its hold by two seats, as the electorate expressed last-minute unease about right-wing tendencies and party leader Don Brash's dallying with the Exclusive Brethren.

In many ways Saturday's result was a mirror of Norman Kirk's Labour landslide in 1972. That was so much bigger because Labour should have won in 1969, but were beaten by electorate concern over industrial unrest.

The extent of National's win, carving into heartland Labour territory and taking Labour votes instead of cannibalising other centre-right parties, is a tribute to its cautious election campaign, even though this was universally condemned as being wishy-washy.

National adopted Labour-lite policies on the one hand and distanced the party from Labour- Greens nanny-state bossiness on the other.

This was easy for John Key, the boy from the state house, who is a natural centrist. It never looked a comfortable position for Dr Brash, who had a record of support for a right-wing agenda.

Mr Key even felt comfortable out-labouring Labour with the blatantly nationalistic pledge to commit 40 per cent of the superannuation fund to New Zealand investment. National added to its ordinary-bloke appeal with a hard line on law and order after an unprecedented spate of child killings, murders and rapes.

The wave of support for National in heartland Labour territory, especially in the Outrageous Fortune land of West Auckland, must have astonished party mandarins on both sides.

Exceptional National Party candidates contributed, such as Paula Bennett in Waitakere, a determined solo mum who got herself off a benefit, into training and management, then into Parliament. She is a walking example of how to step up from the welfare trap. Her experience should be tapped in this area, which Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia has identified as a major problem for Maoridom, echoing the thoughts, decades ago, of inspirational Maori leader Sir Apirana Ngata.

Otaki, the most marginal electorate in the country, was destined to fall, but Labour heartland collapses that would have been unthinkable previously, and which involved the ousting of ministers, included Auckland Central, West Coast- Tasman, New Plymouth and Rotorua.

Some voters, concerned at National's Labour- lite tendencies, shifted support to ACT, no doubt hoping this would bring some steel to National policy-making. But Mr Key will be crucified if he backs down on his symbolic pre-election refusal to have Sir Roger Douglas in his cabinet. And ACT will be in no position to bring the new house down, even if it wanted to, if National manages to include the Maori Party in a support arrangement and thereby broaden the new government's base.

Considering the grim economic realities New Zealand faces over the next three years, that broadened support base will be essential if this government is not to be a one-term wonder.

There are difficult, painful times ahead, with the full extent of the world financial crisis still unknown and an electorate largely unprepared.

It will be a huge maturing process for the Maori Party to be exposed to these economic realities and deliberations in some form of government arrangement.

- © Fairfax NZ News