An inspiration vacuum

Politicians don't have to be bold to win, but the safe approach can deliver underwhelming governments.

- Danyl McLauchlan

Democracy doesn't guarantee you good governments, but it is the only nonviolent way of getting rid of bad ones. Not perfect but still a great deal. As the nation's gaze drifts away from the beaming, self-confident face of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon towards the boyish grin and calculating eyes of Chris Hipkins and contemplates returning Hipkins to power, we're faced with an unpleasant dilemma: which politicians do we dislike the least? Will one major party mismanage the economy less than the other?

Our rejection of Labour in 2023 was a judgment on a government that was disintegrating before the nation's eyes. The recent revelation that education spokesperson Willow-Jean Prime ghosted Erica Stanford's attempts to brief her on education reform recalled the ineptness of many Labour ministers throughout 2023, and the string of resignations heading into the election.

The decision taken by Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson, Hipkins and former Covid-19 response and health minister Ayesha Verrall not to publicly testify before the second Royal Commission of Inquiry into the pandemic on the grounds that it constitutes a "show trial" swirled up the still-murky waters of Covid politics. We got rid of their government but now suspect their replacement is a downgrade rather than a turnaround. Where does that leave us?

There's been much doubt about Te Pāti Māori's suitability for executive office - and this is a reasonable doubt - and a brief flurry of commentary about whether Chlöe Swarbrick could be finance minister (Hipkins: she could not).

But should Chris Hipkins be prime minister again? The current deadlock in the polls and low favourability ratings for both leaders suggest voters are agonising over the unhappy question: who is the least worst person to run the country?

RATINGS DEADLOCK