Editorial: Clark out to break one-term hoodoo

The Prime Minister is defying political history in this country with her decision to hold an early election. In nearly 70 years of Labour or National Governments only two previous Prime Ministers, both National, have called early elections. The Holland Government sought to capitalise on its handling of the 1951 waterfront dispute and won an increased majority. Sir Robert Muldoon threw in the towel at this point in 1984, three months short of the election schedule, and the voters were unimpressed.

Those precedents suggest it is a risky gambit unless the public can see a very good reason for it. The reasons offered by Helen Clark yesterday were more reminiscent of 1984 than 1951. There is no compelling national crisis, pending or past, that might warrant a winter election. As in 1984, the Prime Minister offers parliamentary difficulties as a pretext for calling out the voters as early as July 27.

Since March her Government has been under sustained attack in the House over the Alliance split and the contortions that her deputy, Jim Anderton, has performed in order to circumvent its own legislation against party-hopping. Embarrassing as it might have been, the farce has not noticeably dented Labour's comfortable lead in opinion polls. Unlike 1984, no MP has crossed the floor. Neither of Labour's supporting parties has threatened to deny it the numbers to pass legislation - at least not publicly.

Inevitably when a Prime Minister calls an early election for no apparent need, she invites suspicion that the Government is not as steady as it seems. The Labour Party president has alluded lately to frustrations in getting legislation ready. There is no sign yet, for example, of the promised bill to allow private financial investment in roads - probably crucial to the relief of Auckland's congestion.

Could it be that the Green Party is already proving as difficult behind the scenes as it promises to be after the election if Labour needs its support to govern. The Greens say they will withdraw their support the moment the Government lifts the moratorium on the commercial release of GM organisms. Helen Clark obviously intends to capitalise on public disapproval of small parties that threaten to dictate big decisions. But that is a case she could make as effectively in the spring.

The real reason she is running now may be simply that she is a brisk operator who does not like waiting about for anything. A certain hiatus descends on politics in election year after the Budget has been passed and the country waits for the campaign. Business life, too, is inclined to mark time, wary of the effects a change in Wellington might have on consumption, confidence and investment. The corporate world will applaud the decision to clear the air as early as the end of next month.

If Labour's electoral fortunes do not markedly suffer for this gamble, conventional wisdom will have to be revised. Elections at this point in the triennium might even become common when a party in power is riding high in the polls. But we shall see.

Election campaigns are a levelling exercise. Governing parties have to share the limelight with competitors, all parties with a presence in Parliament or the polls receive public funds for broadcast advertising. Political argument heats up, the electorate is polarised, lifelong loyalties are reinforced. Labour will have few illusions that it is likely to retain the percentages it has been scoring in opinion polls once the campaign has run its course.

The Government now faces a dilemma. Labour is by nature a party of change. Its members are in politics to improve society as they see it. But this Government came to office promising a period of stability and no surprises after 15 years of radical economic surgery by its predecessors. Does Labour now seek re-election offering continued conservatism or has it got a new purpose for a second term.

The Prime Minister's comments yesterday suggested more of the same. She said the Government's priorities for the next term were continued economic and job growth, more investment in health and education, "securing" superannuation and broadly continuing its policies in the environment, arts and culture. It is not exciting.

National's dilemma will be to counter a Government occupying the conservative position that National prefers. Bill English and his team must decide whether to run a normal campaign or take a risk. It could turn the focus onto Labour and ask what might be this Government's real agenda if it is given a second term. That would be risky because it concedes Labour is likely to win, but there seems little point pretending otherwise.

It would be a legitimate question, though, because Labour's overriding aim has been to break the one-term hoodoo of left-leaning Governments. If it is returned on July 27 the hoodoo will be dispelled and the caution that has characterised this term may diminish with it. What surprises may be in store then?

Feature: Election 2002

Election links