As we say goodbye to 2022 and welcome in 2023, it’s a good time to catch up on the very best of the Herald columnists we enjoyed reading over the last 12 months. From politics to sport, from business to entertainment and lifestyle, these are the voices and views our
Audrey Young: Who will replace Jacinda Ardern? Whispers about next Labour leader
Subscribe to listen
Access to Herald Premium articles require a Premium subscription. Subscribe now to listen.
Already a subscriber? Sign in here
Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech.
Opinion by Audrey Young
Audrey Young, Senior Political Correspondent at the New Zealand Herald based at Parliament, specialises in writing about politics and power.
Learn moreAdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
It all went well - until it turned to custard in the midst of a global pandemic and the party is now onto its fourth leader in just over two years.
Succession planning is one of those things that is often talked about in whispered tones within a political party.
It has been five years since Jacinda Ardern became the leader of the Labour Party and internal speculation has already begun about the next Labour leader.
As with Helen Clark and John Key’s prime ministerships, there is no suggestion that Ardern will be challenged.
She is still well in front as preferred Prime Minister in all political polls. But her chances of leading a third-term Government are no longer overwhelming.
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
NZ’s reputation takes a hammering - February 2
Some of the things being written about Jacinda Ardern in the international media are simply appalling.
A columnist in Britain’s Telegraph, for example, described the decision by Ardern to cancel her own wedding as “showy martyrdom”. There was not an ounce of sympathy for what was undoubtedly a distressing decision for any bride to make. I stopped reading at that point.
But not all those abroad stoop to the same level of personal antipathy when criticising New Zealand’s harsh border policies which are preventing thousands of Kiwis from getting home.
Ardern dropped heavy hints that she will be making big announcements this week about relaxing the border rules, which will allow people to isolate at home rather than Government-run facilities.
That is not likely to quickly heal the damage between New Zealand and locked-out Kiwis, many of whom have been abused online for complaining about the system.
But New Zealand’s international reputation has also been damaged.
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
Rating the Cabinet - November 5
It has been an unsatisfactory year for the Government and for some ministers in particular.
Only one of Jacinda Ardern’s 26 ministers scored 9 out of 10 in the Herald’s regular Cabinet Report Card and two senior ministers are among those who have rated only five.
The ratings are out of 10 and reflect a judgment by me about three factors: How effective the minister has been in delivering the Government’s policy; how effective the minister has been in representing the Government to the public; and how valued the minister is to the Government.
See which ministers are up and which are down here
Supreme Court’s audacious decision on tikanga - October 10
The Supreme Court judgment on the use of tikanga is audacious.
It hijacked the Peter Ellis case to insert the issue of tikanga into it when neither of the parties before it had sought it.
It did so while knowing that upon his death from terminal cancer, it already had ample discretion to progress the Ellis case under its current rules without reference to tikanga.
Worse, it has rewritten the law on tikanga knowing full well that the Government had asked the Law Commission to undertake a detailed study of the role of tikanga in common law.
The court decided to usurp that work and pronounce a significant change to the law about when tikanga should be recognised in common law, while at the same time paying lip service to an evolutionary approach to the development of the common law.
It would have been quite appropriate for the court to have developed new law if it had been essential for the Ellis case, and there was a gap in policy development.
Neither of those is true.
The sorry tale of a senseless decision - August 23
The expulsion of Gaurav Sharma from the Labour caucus is the most senseless divorce between an MP and a party since Alamein Kopu in 1997.
If an MP is prepared to go down fighting on a point of principle, the principle should be greater than the difference between the mediation Sharma was offered and the inquiry he wanted on workplace management.
Both would have required someone without an interest in the outcome to have explored the claims and counter-claims in an effort to find a resolution.
The longer Sharma has gone on, the more he has enjoyed the attention, and less convincing he has been in his case for an inquiry.
Read Audrey Young’s full column here
