Generally speaking, such political leaders could be described as "populist". Around the world, we've had quite a few emerge in the last couple of years - usually coming from the political wilderness, in very short order, to occupy a seat of power in a traditional political party that has been struggling for oxygen - the British Labour party, the American Republicans, the Canadian Liberals.
In typical Gallic manner, the French had to invent a new party to accommodate their current president. Now, in Jacinda Adern, I fear we might have our own.
My own political understandings were developed while I was a young adult in my native Canada. Pierre Trudeau burst on to the scene, to grab the reins of the Liberal Party and single-handedly steer it to victory in 1968.
Once in power, though, it was almost impossible to determine where the government stood on any particular issue. One minute this, another minute that. I was drawn to the Tories - they were centre-right, yes, and they told you where they stood on the issues. Before elections. Very principled, and I admire and try to emulate people and movements of principle.
Invariably, Trudeau took aim and attacked - only to adopt the policies he attacked within months of winning power again.
Political parties that trade on the personality of their leader have always worried me, because you never know what you are getting once they are in power. I know John Key might be described by some as "popular", even "charismatic", but I don't think National traded on that as its sole commodity, or anything near. And you know where you stand with National - sound economic management. You know that's what you are getting, and you can count on it.
One of the reasons we can still count on it with National is that there is an experienced team to deliver it. Our system of government relies on a strong, unified Cabinet and governing party caucus. National's front bench and caucus work together as a team - they are all on the same page.
However, when I look at Labour's caucus and candidate lineup, I am sore-pressed to see a Cabinet. In our British Parliamentary tradition, a strong Cabinet is vital. We aren't electing a President. We are electing a Prime Minister - "Prime" as in "first, but not only". We cannot afford to entrust our democracy to three years of "Captain's Calls".
So National tells me what their plans and policies are - in detail - ahead of an election, and Labour can't or won't. National has the united team to deliver on their promises - I can't see enough of that in Labour's lineup. That should be enough to convince me, but it isn't.
I am a retired Anglican priest. Some of you might say to yourselves, "Wait a minute! Isn't that the Labour party at prayer?" Well, no, not really - I think most of us Anglican clergy and laypeople would describe ourselves as "centrist" - neither left nor right, because we have an innate distrust of ideological rigidity. We would look for the hallmarks of compassion, for signs of respect for community, for opportunities to care.
One thing I have learned in life is that compassion cannot be legislated. It must be freely shared or it is no longer compassion - it is either condescension or it is imposition. I have learned that community forms from the grassroots up, and cannot be expected to thrive artificially. I have learned that the more government does in the name of "care", the less opportunities for caring WE have. In short, government should not be about being "in power", but about empowerment.
I see empowerment in the social policies of the National party leaving more money in the hands of low and middle-income families. I see disempowerment in a rejection of that tax policy, using the money raised from those taxes to foist more programmes "for" low and middle-income families. How arrogant! "We know better how to spend your money than you do."
In Alastair Scott, we are very fortunate to have a Member of Parliament who represents the interests of the Wairarapa electorate in caucus, who lobbies Cabinet ministers on our behalf, and who speaks for us in the House. He stands proudly with National and supports party policy. He is a team player.
I can't say the same for the Labour candidate, Kieran McAnulty. Concerning Labour's proposed water tax, he is quoted in this newspaper as saying: "Once I have a conversation, and voters realise I wouldn't support a policy which would affect farmers, they're happy." I doubt it. I know I am not happy - I don't know where you stand, and I don't believe this makes you a team player.
And if the Labour party caucus is going to have such members, it will continue to be the fractious, back-biting and unpredictable party for which it has a reputation.
Tim Delaney is a retired Anglican priest, who served as vicar of Dannevirke. He has been a member of the Dannevirke Community Board and various other community organisations. Tim and Margie Delaney live with their dogs in Dannevirke.
Different writers with a centre-right perspective will be writing this column in the run-up to the election this month.
All opinions are the writer's and not those of Hawke's Bay Today.
