John Armstrong: Super decision signals end to National lethargy

In ditching its opposition to Michael Cullen's superannuation fund, the National Party has done the gymnastically impossible: it has executed a major u-turn yet taken a huge leap forward.

Don Brash's announcement that National will retain the fund is further evidence the party is shaking off its lethargy of recent months.

Sagging support in the polls - the Sunday Star-Times-BRC survey showing National a massive 14 percentage points behind Labour being the latest and worst of them - has prompted a long-overdue rethink on media strategy.

This has resulted in Dr Brash gaining far more exposure during the past couple of weeks.

The intention is to get the leader commenting on a broader range of issues - as long as that does not dilute Brash's "brand" as someone who is upfront, credible and likeable.

Inevitably, that means grabbing the limelight off caucus colleagues. But Helen Clark did likewise when she was Leader of the Opposition.

At the same time, National is starting to roll out policy.

Last week the party confirmed it will not stand candidates in the Maori constituencies and promised to abolish the seats.

Next week Dr Brash is scheduled to deliver a major positioning speech on tax policy, although the subject matter has still to be confirmed.

This week brings the defensive move to keep the Cullen fund.

Infuriated by Labour's penchant for stealing its policy clothes, National is taking delight in neutralising one of Labour's potent lines of attack for a change.

The loss of momentum suffered by Dr Brash and his party can partly be blamed on the lengthy time it has taken to develop policy, particularly its stance on the Cullen fund.

The party previously promised to scrap the fund and it has been up for debate since National's annual conference in July.

Until that was sorted out, the party could not determine how much room it has for tax cuts and addressing spending priorities.

The price of keeping the fund is that those tax cuts may have to be far more moderate than some in the party would have hoped.

But in the end the National caucus accepted the pragmatists' view that it was pointless fighting a battle the party could not win.

No matter how valid its view that governments should first pay off debt rather than salt money away in a fund, National found that argument doing nothing to alleviate New Zealanders' insecurity about their retirement income, whereas the Cullen fund was a visible and ever-accumulating reminder that Labour recognised those fears.

The big question is whether this sudden burst of activity comes too late to lift National out of the doldrums.

Whatever, there can be no more grumbling that National is still sitting back and complacently waiting for things to happen.