Forget the new details of National’s relationship with the Exclusive Brethrens and allegations of the party’s dodgy financial links with business – the most interesting story in Nicky Hagar’s new book is the picture it paints of the internal machinations and cynicism of National’s leadership inner circle. Below is a synopsis of what Hagar found to occur in the parliamentary wing – based partly on Raymond Miller’s review of the book. As Miller notes, Hagar’s book conveys ‘an impression of cynicism towards the voting public bordering on contempt’. It would be naïve to assume that what goes on in the National Party is dramatically different to the other parliamentary parties.
Miller characterises the story told in Hollow Men as that of the struggle between the ideological purists who helped put Don Brash in charge and the pragmatists in the leader's office. This is the classic conflict ‘between principle and the pursuit of power’.
On the one hand, Brash and his natural coterie are basically Act party true believers – they want to kick start the neo-liberal economic reforms, including introducing a voucher system into education, and undertaking "real" welfare reform (which included such policies as the compulsory adoption of children born to woman under 18 that weren’t supported by the mother’s family). According to the book, much of the parliamentary wing resented this approach together with ‘Brash's heavy reliance on a cabal of right-wing outsiders’.
On the other hand, Brash’s highly influential party professional advisers in his office at Parliament seemed to be the chief of staff Richard Long, who talked of the need for inoculation from claims of extremism, Matthew Hooton, who strongly advised the need for the ‘one law for all’ speech to ‘put the shits up Labour and force them into a more radical pro-Maori position and pick up red neck votes as well" regarding the one law for all speech’, and Peter Keenan, the frank and cynical policy adviser and speechwriter whose emails provide the most entertaining extracts in Hager’s book. Keenan is quoted as advising that ‘The secret of success is sincerity and conviction. Once you can fake that you have got it made." This is stunning and classic cynicism. Keenan also reminds his colleagues that they are playing a political game rather than meaningful politics, and that the parliamentary team should act accordingly: "please everybody we are talking about the electorate's perceptions here not the reality (unfortunately they vote on the former)".
The pragmatists succeed in watering down Brash’s politics, by axing his ‘more radical and less popular economic ideas’, and instead crafting a repackaging plan based around ‘highly populist, anti-PC speeches on race, welfare and law and order’. And apparently Brash reacted to this "descent into unprincipled politics" with a mixture of hesitancy and compliance.
The story is one about the intrigue of special advisers and party professionalisation, it’s one of media duplicity. Michael Bassett, the ex-Labour Party minister turned Act party supporter and supposed ‘independent writer and commentator’ seems to have played a special role as adviser and public cheerleader. For example, when Bill English was National leader, Bassett closely advised Brash on how Brash might topple English, even writing him a five-page campaign plan for the task, and then on the day of the leadership vote, published a column in the Dominion Post entitled ‘Time to stand aside, Bill" which promoted Brash as the ‘only credible option’. So much for being an independent commentator. Bassett then contributed to Brash's famous Orewa speech, which Bassett then applauded in his column.
A US political adviser, Dick Allen, who was previously a key figure in the campaigns of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan is drafted in for special ammunition. He advises Brash to use the term ‘mainstream’ to divert criticism of radicalism, and National subsequently adopt the word as central campaign slogan. Likewise, in speaking events Brash starts using a backdrop of the five words of ‘Family, Security, Work, Community, Freedom’ after Dick Allen points out Ronald Regan’s successful use of ‘Family, Neighbourhood, Work, Peace, Freedom’ in a similar way.
As Raymond Miller notes, the book conveys the cynicism of today’s parties and their leadership circles, and as such I agree that it probably ‘deserves to be read by all those who care about the state of our democracy’. The behaviour highlighting in the book is not an aberration, but the norm in today’s parliamentary politics.
