John Armstrong: National inflicts more self-abuse

Brand new Parliament; same old story. So much for National's promise to point the blow-torch mercilessly at Labour as the new parliamentary session picks up steam.

National instead turned the flame on itself yesterday, as it tried to cope with two separate "apologies" - the first from renegade backbencher Brian Connell for continually criticising his leader; the second which Gerry Brownlee is honour-bound to make at some point for taking a careless swipe at the Governor-General.

These self-inflicted distractions diverted attention from yesterday's Speech from the Throne in which the Government ruled out "substantial" tax cuts during the next three years.

That should have been music to National MPs' ears. They should have been exposing the downside of Labour's axing of interest charges on student loans following the tabling of enabling legislation yesterday.

But National was too busy making a hash of its handling of Mr Connell.

The party had either to punish him severely by suspending him from the caucus or humiliate him by extracting a grovelling apology. Don Brash opted for the latter. It gave Mr Connell one last chance to pull his head in. Meanwhile, the Rakaia MP remains very much on probation.

But that is not the impression anyone will draw from reading the joint press statement issued by the leader and the rebel.

That has the backbencher apologising for comments which had been "seen" as critical of the leader and the party. Mr Connell also "deeply regretted" the way his comments were "interpreted".

This is sophistry. The remarks which got him into trouble were ones he penned himself. It was impossible to misinterpret them. His angry colleagues certainly did not.

However, allowing him to say he had been misinterpreted allowed Mr Connell to save face. That may be better than leaving him wanting revenge.

But the compromise language rebounded on Dr Brash when he emerged from the morning's caucus meeting, stuck in "no comment" mode and ducking questions about the press statement's wording.

Not a good look. But it got worse as he sought the refuge of his office. Reporters further ambushed him for a response to Mr Brownlee's declaration that he had "lost respect" for Dame Silvia Cartwright - an extremely serious charge coming from the major Opposition party.

The deputy leader's gripe was that the Governor-General had not contacted Dr Brash during post-election negotiations to see if he could form a government.

She had only listened to advice from Helen Clark, who had trampled over longstanding constitutional conventions of collective Cabinet responsibility so she could sign up Winston Peters and Peter Dunne.

However, it now turns out that Brash could have rung Dame Silvia.

The Prime Minister's office revealed yesterday that she had been willing to talk to party leaders during the negotiations, although she stressed it was not her role to intervene.

The Cabinet Office, the first point of contact, alerted National to this two days after the election.

Presumably, no one told Mr Brownlee, whose outburst yesterday left his leader with a quandary.

Not surprisingly, Dr Brash refused to say in whom he had confidence - the Governor-General or his deputy?

Expressing confidence in one would have been a slap in the face for the other. Saying nothing was not really an option either.

Still, National can rely on all this being soon forgotten. One question is not so lightly dismissed: Why does National keep getting itself into these predicaments?