KEY POINTS:
American pundits talk often of the big M. To them, momentum is a crucial advantage in any political race. At the moment, American presidential hopeful Barack Obama has it in the contest for the Democratic nomination. Locally, the National Party is, likewise, on a roll, as evidenced by three polls in little more than a week that have shown it with, at best, a 23-point gap over Labour and, at worst, a 19-point advantage. Now, Peter Dunne, in a madcap moment, has been moved to compare National's leader with Mr Obama. "John Key is fresh and relatively unknown," says the United Future leader, "and doesn't that sound like Barack Obama?"
Actually, there is no real comparison. Unlike Senator Obama, Mr Key does not speak lyrically of hopes and visions and certainly has no acquaintance with adulation. In fact, he probably bears a closer resemblance to John McCain, the stolid Republican front-runner. Or perhaps Kevin Rudd. Indeed, Mr Key is seeking to emulate the Australian Prime Minister, who established a strong lead for the Labor Party 12 months out from an election and rode it to victory over John Howard. Already, Mr Key has been busy tapping into one of the elements of Mr Rudd's success by ensuring there are no easy targets for Labour. A possible decision to stick with the Working for Families programme is the latest chapter in a book that includes the likes of KiwiSaver, the privatisation of state-owned enterprises, nuclear ships and climate change.
Mr Rudd's victory was, however, not as decisive as polls said it would be. History suggests it will be no different here. Labour has the advantage of an entrenched voting bloc, a state of affairs re-emphasised by the fact that by March 31, Working for Families will reach almost 400,000 families with dependent children. The party can tap deep into the poor and disadvantaged, many of whom are not naturally inclined to vote. Further, if the contest is close, it is able more readily to fashion a governing coalition.
Labour's problem, however, is that a mood for change may already be embedded. If so, the tide has simply run out on it, as happened with Mr Howard and as, in the local context, occurred with Jenny Shipley's National Government in 1999. When that happens, voters are not hearing any more. Worse, they see a party that is unable to do anything right. Prime Minister Helen Clark must, indeed, have felt that way last week during her stand-off with expatriate benefactor Owen Glenn at the opening of the University of Auckland Business School. Whether she acknowledged his presence or not, she was bound to be criticised.
The Prime Minister conceded yesterday that, if Labour was to win a fourth term, it had work to do. "We have to work on being a Government of substance, a Government of vision, a Government which has big ideas," she said. To achieve that, Labour had "a ton of ideas" that would be unveiled this year. Exactly this must happen if Labour is to have any chance of reversing its waning popularity. It must keep trying to gain traction for its policies, even though that is not happening at the moment.
Its other major pursuit, the attempted flailing of Mr Key over relatively trite matters, serves no purpose. Labour's criticism is disappearing into the ether because the public is not receptive to it. As much has been confirmed by this month's polling. Labour's poll support last year averaged just over 37 per cent. That, according to the three polls, has now slipped to as low as 32 per cent or, in the best-case scenario, 34 per cent. The big plus for Labour is that there remains time to buttress this position. It will have to use that well by presenting policies that make voters want to listen.
