Matt McCarten: Don Brash may bequeath victory to National as he falls on his sword

I said in this column after the last general election that Don Brash had missed his only chance to be Prime Minister and that he wouldn't lead the National Party into the next election. Despite the great surge back to National under his leadership, he didn't quite pull it off. Seasoned political strategists privately blame Brash for losing the election by bungling the outing of the Exclusive Brethrens. Of course everyone is an expert in hindsight. The fact of course is that Brash did well as a novice and many of his party's MPs wouldn't be there if he wasn't leader.

Brash's big strength he brought to the National Party campaign was his gravitas and integrity. Even though he came across as nerdy it worked for him. The only time where a question mark came into our heads during the campaign was when he stumbled over the revelations of secret funding of the pro-National campaign by the Brethren. Brash appeared to have been caught out in a fib over what he knew but we were prepared to give him the benefit of doubt when he got flustered and angrily declared he did not tell lies.

And that's why his leadership is over. The one big strength he had was being "Honest Don". His integrity is in tatters and his political career won't survive it. Brash's foolish statement in his caucus this week saying that he had "not lied to the public" reminds me of Bill Clinton looking into the cameras a few years back declaring "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" when sprung over his dalliances with Monica Lewinsky.

Clinton was taking a loose interpretation of telling the truth as is Brash over his alleged affair. Obviously Brash doesn't think his family are members of the public.

Only ghouls would be relishing Brash's discomfort. I have no interest in commenting on his obvious relationship crisis. But the public does have a right to know and indeed judge any aspiring leader of this nation over his hypocrisy.

Remember it was Brash and his wife who discussed in public his adultery behind the back of his first wife. He piously declared in magazines that his earlier deceit had taught him a painful lesson and expounded on how it nearly destroyed him knowing the hurt it caused to others. Somehow it made him more human. Now it seems he was having an affair with a married woman while he was peddling this line.

Remember all that sanctimonious posturing by Brash during the election that he represented "mainstream New Zealanders" and their values? Apparently this didn't include gays and other "minorities".

I've always found it suspicious that some politicians feel the need to preach at us about moral values.

The more extreme their rhetoric the more sinister it seems. Remember Graham Capill?

The mere fact that Brash has employed a spin doctor this week (taxpayer funded, I presume) to "manage" the fallout from his adultery confirms he is just another huckster trying to worm his way out of a tight spot. Honest Don? Not any more. It's only a matter of time now that Brash will have to quit. New Zealanders are forgiving but can't stomach hypocrites.

The National Party strategists must be choking as they had Labour on the ropes and had cruised past them in the opinion polls. But the "numbers men" will take comfort that whilst their party was way up, their leader isn't. Therefore their conclusion will be that their party's rise is more to do with the anti-Labour mood growing than the popularity of their leader. A change at the top won't hurt them electorally.

The ambitious lieutenants will be hoping Brash can be persuaded to be a gentleman and make a dignified exit.

The obvious new leadership combo is John Key and Bill English. English is better but it's unlikely the Nats will give him another chance after being given a drubbing by Helen Clark in 2002. Key is a fresh face and does well against Michael Cullen. He's as right-wing as Brash so that should keep the ideologues happy and the softer Nats will have a sympathetic ear with English assuming he becomes deputy. It is an added bonus having a North Island-South Island; city-rural; right-centre; fresh-experienced balance with these two.

Of course it's unfair to Gerry Brownlee as he is underrated as a leader. If the Nats wanted to win more votes off Labour then they should go for Brownlee but they are far too class-ridden and cautious to do that. If they are going to change the leader, they may as well do the deputy as well. Unfair to Brownlee, but good politics.

Labour should get short-term advantage by having the misuse of taxpayer funds for their election and Phillip Field move off central stage. But it's a mixed blessing.

Despite the polls, most of the backroom strategists have had their money on Clark being able to beat Brash at the next election. A change of leadership in the Nats will even the odds for National to take out Labour.

At the top of the game you can't get away with what Brash has done. He has lost his credibility. And that in politics is everything. Ironically Brash's personal loss is National's gain. The sooner Brash falls on his sword, the better it is for National.