Editorial: Early election would be a cynical ploy

Opinion

According to an old political adage, New Zealand prime ministers who call early elections for no good reason are punished at the ballot-box. Traditionally, the electorate has been quick to demonstrate its disdain for manoeuvring that owes everything to self-interest and nothing to good government. This belief, however, took a hammering at the 2002 general election. Helen Clark's justification for an early election - that her Administration could not govern effectively because of the implosion of her coalition partner - withstood little more than a smidgen of scrutiny. Yet Labour was returned for a second term with a manageable set of cards.

That success offers Helen Clark obvious encouragement to seize upon circumstances tipped the Government's way and again call an early poll, perhaps in July. A second trip to that well, however, would rest on the thinnest of excuses. Indeed, it would be a blatant breach of the convention that governments should run their full three-year term unless their ability to manage is seriously threatened. An early election this year would be nothing more than an exercise in opportunism.

The drums are, nonetheless, beating in the Labour ranks. Helen Clark was coy at last weekend's party conference but the state of readiness was palpable. Labour, which has opened up a 13 per cent gap on the National Party, according to the latest Herald-DigiPoll survey, senses there will be no better time for seeking a third term. This belief is based largely on a fear of the unknown, of what might happen if the Government were to run its full course, the threat, in particular, of further unexpected and damaging developments of the John Tamihere variety.

Then, there is the danger implicit in National being given more time to organise itself and orchestrate its campaign. A worst-case scenario would see it armed with a policy which triggered a reaction like that following Don Brash's race-relations speech at Orewa. And it is possible the economic prosperity, in which the Government has bathed, may dull. Even if this danger is overestimated, the good times are unlikely to be as beneficent six months hence.

This fear of what may lie ahead makes an election as soon as possible after the May 19 Budget a sensible proposition for the Labour Party. But that is entirely different from what best serves the process of democracy and the public interest. Under MMP-style governments, there must always be the choice of calling an early election for administrations that can no longer govern effectively. The imposition of fixed parliamentary terms is not an option, whatever their desirability. But the choice of an early poll should be reserved for the one circumstance, not hijacked as a ploy to advantage a government.

The option has, of course, long been abused elsewhere. In 1983, Margaret Thatcher seized on victory in the Falklands War and ineffectual Labour Party leadership to call an early poll. The move was successful, paving the way for her long occupation of Downing St. More recently, John Howard has had no qualms about tying his political fortunes to the strength of the Australian economy. That, however, is no excuse for the practice becoming equally commonplace here.

Labour, as it is fond of boasting, heads a stable Government. There is no reason for it not to complete its full term. Any justification for an early election would be baseless. The danger for Helen Clark is that this time it would be identified as such. She may consider that National's weakness will insulate her from a strong backlash. But the risk remains. The electorate's response to Dr Brash's Orewa speech was a warning that not too much should be taken for granted. A surrender to self-interest would still invite the sort of retribution that voters should deliver the cynical.