Stuart Nash's ongoing presence is an embarrassing reminder for Labour of a remarkable act of self-destruction that could become very uncomfortable over the following months
Opinion: Stuart Nash’s decision not to seek re-election to his Napier seat was inevitable after his resignation as a minister last week. In effect, his political career was over. The Prime Minister’s “no way back” comment had abruptly closed the door on any rehabilitation after a period on the backbenches, or even a term in Opposition. Under those circumstances, it would have been impossible for Nash to have carried on.
But Nash’s decision to withdraw from politics at the election does not end the mess he created over recent weeks. There are still many awkward questions that Labour must deal with before the issue is behind it.
The first relates to Nash’s actual plans for his departure. So far, he has said he will not cause a by-election (meaning he will not resign pre-emptively from Parliament before April 15), and that he will not seek re-election in October. But he has not said anything about his intentions between mid-April and the October election date.
While he is, by all accounts, a popular MP within his own caucus and around the House generally, his ongoing presence is an embarrassing reminder of a remarkable act of self-destruction that could become very uncomfortable over the following months.
This will be especially so if, as seems highly likely, the Ombudsman’s and Cabinet Secretary’s inquiries reveal more instances where Nash acted in breach of the Cabinet Manual. In that event, the pressure could intensify on Nash to go altogether, as soon as possible, rather than hang around until election day as a spare but unwelcome part of the Government.
READ MORE:
* Call for official information penalties following Nash saga
* Evidence Stuart Nash breached official information laws
* Perception problems hang over PM after inevitable Nash sacking
Parliament’s Easter recess provides a little breathing space, but once the House resumes in early May, the focus will shift to the Budget, due on May 18. That will be the Government’s last big showpiece before the election, having to deal with the deteriorating economic situation and the effect of the cyclones, while setting the scene for the Government’s re-election campaign.
With the Minister of Finance already having ruled out any Budget sweeteners this year, the Government’s messaging about the Budget will have to be very skilful and spot-on, if it is to have any positive political effect. The last thing the Government would want in the selling-period post-Budget and the lead-up to the election would be any distractions.
The impact the revelations over the past few weeks about his conduct have had on the Government, and the political system generally, make it almost impossible for him to leave quietly
That may well be the time there is a quiet word in Nash’s ear to stand aside quickly and get well out of the way before the election campaign gets underway. (As a retiring MP, Nash would in any case have the cushion of continuing to receive a salary for three months after his departure.)
Once Nash is off the political scene, the level of public interest in his activities and transgressions will fall off considerably. The public has only limited tolerance for the continued public washing of the dirty linen of discredited public figures.
With the uncertainty surrounding what the inquiries into Nash’s conduct may disclose, the Labour Party is likely to be very keen to put as much distance between it and Nash as quickly as possible. It will be far easier to do that once he is no longer sitting in the caucus or on the government backbench.
But Nash also poses an ongoing problem for the Labour Party in other ways. He represents the genuine Labour bloke, a rapidly declining element within today’s Parliamentary party. There have already been comments outside beltway Wellington that the Nash affair is not a big deal, and that in his comments to the Commissioner of Police, for example, Nash was really saying what most people thought anyway, so what was the problem?
With the current emphasis on “cultural safety”, there is a real risk to Labour that some of the party’s core supporters could conclude Labour no longer represents them, and that Nash is paying the price for being a red-blooded, upfront bloke who says what he thinks.
What happens in his Napier seat will be critical here. Nash was already facing a strong contest from an active National candidate, and the selection of a new Labour candidate will be watched with interest. Labour will need to select a candidate who embodies the values and outlook of that provincial area.
It can certainly not afford to parachute in a preferred candidate from outside if it wishes to retain Napier. Ideally, the new Labour candidate for Napier should be a toned-down version of Stuart Nash, with his passion, but better judgment and without the arrogant bravado.
Though that may not be enough to save Napier, it will be important in sending a signal to other provincial electorates held by Labour that the party still represents their values. Conversely, a candidate who is not a local, or who looks like a head office preference, would be disastrous and potentially create a negative wave across other provincial electorates about Labour’s attitude towards them.
Nash may well choose to bow out of politics silently, not wishing to make any more waves than he already has done. But the impact the revelations over the past few weeks about his conduct have had on the Government, and the political system generally, make it almost impossible for him to leave quietly.
The combination of circumstances, and the prospect of more developments to come, mean that Labour’s likely wish that Nash now becomes like Macavity – TS Eliot’s cat who was just “not there” – will not come to pass.
One way or another, whenever he goes or stays, Stuart Nash will have an impact on our politics for a while yet.
