Clive Bibby
by Clive Bibby
One has to admit that Chris Hipkins is proving to be a dab hand at re-floating the sinking ship — HMNZS Labour Government. In my humble opinion he is justifiably drawing credit for doing things that others had considered too hard or would result in broken promises to an electorate desperate for answers to its problems.
Some would call it courageous, others simply pragmatic at a time when he has little choice if he is to have any chance of electoral success come October.
Probably it’s a bit of both but nonetheless, it has to be seen as refreshing from a politician who had been one of the architects promoting the ill-advised policies that had become a millstone around the Government’s neck.
It is rare for any senior Cabinet Minister, let alone the Prime Minister, to admit that some of their keystone policies had to be abandoned because to pursue them would further aggravate a situation that was fast becoming out of control.
It had to happen.
It is perhaps ironic that Chris Hipkins, by choosing the only sensible option available to him in the dire circumstances he faced, may have changed the public perception of his Government to such an extent that he could go on to win it a third term after what, only two months ago, was looking like being a “wipeout” electoral defeat.
The latest polls clearly suggest that is becoming a real possibility.
Who would have thought things could change so rapidly, although we must not forget the old adage that “a week is a long time in politics”.
But when you examine political history, the evidence suggests that many of the world’s past leaders have enjoyed success beyond their expected tenures by choosing to do what the public demanded at the time, in spite of the shrill objections from colleagues and coalition partners whose pet projects got the chop in the process.
No matter, the fact remains that Chris Hipkins’ position is dependent on what the voters think of his Government and his performance as their Prime Minister — not those whose objections will be irrelevant in the final analysis.
I say well done Prime Minister. Although it will be obvious to those who know my political leanings that it is difficult for me to acknowledge this smart move from someone who is the antithesis of what l stand for, it is important as something l must do in order to remain credible as a critic.
Having said that, for me it is clear that this “new broom” approach has some way to go before l can give it my unequivocal endorsement.
Here’s why!
There are still programmes that remain in the Government’s legislative pipeline that need to be ditched — 3 waters, revised history curriculum, Maori wards, separate health authorities and co-governance of major agencies to name a few — before l will be satisfied that this latest attempt to give the people what they want is the result we are looking for.
I’m sure many other mere mortals would agree that there is still some way to go.