Editorial: Bold steps can take parties into clean air

What is eating Helen Clark? What can have possessed her to term National leader Don Brash "corrosive and cancerous"? By any yardstick, there was little to gain, and much to lose. Could it be, then, that the weight of criticism levelled at Labour over the use of public funds to produce its election pledge card, allied to the smear campaign against her husband, has caused her to lose her bearings? Has a usually calm and astute figure fallen victim to the perils of personal politics?

One thing is certain. The Prime Minister's sour persona is doing her no favours. Perhaps she needs to take time to recollect that, on first entering parliamentary politics, she was far from universally popular. A stern, somewhat humourless visage held limited appeal. By dint of effort and effective guidance, she became a politician capable of sustaining a remarkably high rating as preferred Prime Minister.

That level of esteem is being endangered by her present behaviour. Middle New Zealand, the territory she has cultivated so assiduously, shows little appetite for politics based on mud-slinging and personal attacks. Labour Party supporters may continue to support her, and find excuses for her spiteful criticisms, but others are more likely to see the re-emergence of a figure unworthy of their backing.

That impression will deepen the longer this behaviour continues. She, and Labour, will not get out of their jam by continuing to lash out at their opponents. No profit will come from the "unpleasant environment" she foresees in Parliament if National continues to allege "corruption".

There is one logical solution for Labour's difficulties. It must pay back any taxpayer money found to have been unlawfully spent on electioneering. The Greens this week joined several other parties in opting for this. Labour should follow suit, abandoning its deeply unpopular proposal to introduce legislation to validate spending identified as unlawful in the Auditor-General's final report.

The Greens' move, decided even though they are puzzled by the Auditor-General's interpretation of the rules, has been widely applauded. This, to some degree, would also happen if Labour took the same action. More importantly, it would, in one step, take the party to the political equivalent of clean air.

National, for its part, must rid itself of the hindrance that hovers, sword of Damocles-like, over it. Its links to the Exclusive Brethren, and the $1.2 million campaign orchestrated by the sect, may well have cost the party the last election. Now, National is caught in the wash whenever Helen Clark accuses the Exclusive Brethren of smear campaigns. Again, the solution is simple. Victoria's National Party leader, Peter Ryan, who is contesting a state election in November, has said he will not accept donations from the sect. Don Brash should dissociate his party in the same way.

Will all this happen? The omens are not propitious. Even United Future leader Peter Dunne, Parliament's self-proclaimed voice of reason, is becoming more irrational by the day.

Not content with breaching protocol in a particularly jarring way by claiming the former Solicitor-General had besmirched the reputation of MPs, he now claims the Auditor-General's investigation into election spending is "a mess". The intimidatory intent and luridness of his tone are as disgraceful as the extent of his disconnection from reality.

These leaders need to step back and recognise the peril of their behaviour. Sober analysis suggests they can eradicate the potential for continued distasteful conduct quite easily. And that they have much to lose if they do not do so.