In 1972, Helen Clark was a first-time voter and attended the then Labour Party leader – and soon to be elected prime minister – Norman Kirk’s Auckland election address.

It was 27 years before she found herself in his situation: this time she was on the platform. She found similarities.

In 1972, New Zealand was “drowning” under the weight of a long-serving National Party government.

In 1999, the then National government was in a shambles, “propped up by a ragtag mob of defectors and opportunists”.

The 1972 Miss Clark was converted to Norman Kirk’s attractive vision for New Zealand, but she was also a feminist and it was to that cause that she, along with others such as Margaret Wilson, later to become party president and Speaker, was first aligned.

Most of her political activity in those years involved pushing the misogynistic Labour Party towards a broader canvass, and to interest it in affairs beyond these shores, especially the socialist revolutions then succeeding – and failing – in the Americas.

She formed firm and independent views on foreign policy early – marching against New Zealand involvement in the Vietnam War, for example – and this was reflected many years later when she refused, despite pressure from Australia, Britain and the United States, to send troops to the war in Iraq; these and other policies drew international attention to New Zealand, and a great deal of admiration.

She began to be noted in the party and by 1981, the year of the Springbok tour, was elected to Parliament. In 1984, after the snap election, Labour found itself in power with Roger Douglas imposing market reforms on the economy. Miss Clark became a minister in the January 1989 Cabinet reshuffle, taking conservation and health, and deputy prime minister to Geoffrey Palmer eight months later when David Lange resigned.

In 1993, now with Labour in opposition and much divided, she toppled Mike Moore, showing to her caucus and a wider public the steel she had concealed. This became even more evident three years later when senior MPs, led by Michael Cullen, tried unsuccessfully to talk her into resigning, given Labour’s disastrous polling. Yet by 1999, undoubtedly helped by the collapse of support for the National Party coalition, she was able to lead her party to victory.

She has won more elections than any other Labour prime minister, is the second longest-serving Labour prime minister, is the longest-serving Labour leader and the first woman to lead a New Zealand political party, and was New Zealand’s first elected woman prime minister. By most measures, she has also been a most able manager of the various governments she has led, second only to Peter Fraser in terms of ability, and equally as tough.

Her transformation by 1999 from a somewhat distant bluestocking into a fashionably dressed, highly visible and accessible, and popular political figure emphasises her ruthless determination to do whatever was necessary to gain power so that, as she constantly put it, “ordinary people” could “reclaim our country”.

Miss Clark was smart enough, too, to surround herself with ability and her intellectual peers while never allowing for any misunderstanding as to who was in charge. In Michael Cullen, she had a competent and eventually fully loyal finance minister; in Pete Hodgson she had a trustworthy strategist; in Steven Maharey and Trevor Mallard she had a social democratic theorist and a committed loyalist to keep the troops in line.

Her staff appointments were exceptional public servants, and her close female friends people on whom she could rely, and in whose company she could relax. Managing a Labour Party caucus – never easy – was compounded by having also to manage successive coalitions, with all the implied ego conflicts and concessions.

That she succeeded for three terms is tribute to her hard-learned political management skills, her insistence on inclusiveness. Her chief weakness – economic matters – was exposed when she failed to take steps sufficiently early to halt the alarming housing debt bubble, and to direct Dr Cullen to return the surpluses from whence they came earlier than he did.

But it was also obvious in the past year or so that Miss Clark, faced with a new Opposition leader representing a younger generation, had also for the first time relinquished control of the political agenda.

To the extent that she is, at heart, relatively conservative (with a small “c”) and a gradualist, the appearance of a new boy on the block with fresh ideas proved one distraction too many for a controlling prime minister who was, in all manner of things, “the government”.

Being a woman leader in a country still largely in the adolescent stages of social and gender equality was never easy, and Miss Clark has had to suffer more than her fair share of rumours and innuendo, almost all of which she ignored unless it involved those closest to her.

Under her leadership, women were appointed to the nation’s top public roles, and gender equality as a rational process in the workplace and as an example to younger aspirants, made progress. Her personal stewardship of the arts – the first by any prime minister – showed to the world that New Zealand is much more than No 8 wire, All Black rugby, pretty scenery, beer, and millions of sheep.

With Dr Cullen working the numbers, Miss Clark succeeded in reintroducing social equity to the nation and making progress in improving the lot of those who used to be called in the 1990s “the underclass”.

She can claim to have brought New Zealand closer to social democratic ideals, and she has set a very high bar for her successors.

SV asks, what of the legacy our past leaders have left Fiji and her people?



  1. Tim Says:

    Unfortunately some have left children that have adopted a “born-to-rule” attitude and a sense of entitlement at the expense of anything merely on the basis of a name.
    Most have average to below-average credentials – some have credentials that are suspect.
    A hell of a lot of them can only be described as pathalogical liars with personality disorders.
    It is not just the legacy of Fijian born “leaders” (and one has to use the word leader cautiously), but also those failed imports that seem to gain credibility simply on the basis of their offshore occupation.
    I’m sorry but I have to conclude that Fiji is in reality some poor bastard’s idea of a bugger’s muddle which has evolved into a society that hinges on some aura of an “image” that is far from any concept of reality (Gates, Pryde, Nazi Sha Sha, wannabe YipYip – the judicial sages; Shaista – the pistol shooting champion of human rights; Castoffs of church leaders that elsewhere would currently be under investigation for abuse all trying to set themselves up for retirement; a Military that is STILL trying to survive on some past reputation and adorning itself in colourful uniform). It really is quite pathetic. That image causes many (such as myself, and probably Colin Bishop) to become enchanted with but unfortunately it’s false.
    And the reason its false is because (as Tim Shadbolt once said), it’s all based on a firm foundation on solid bullshit.
    The Gates, the Ganilaus (current round), the Bainimaramas, the Kaihyums, the Shameens, the Telenis, Dritis, the Chow Noodle “authoritative” VeeJays, the closet Prydes, the John Samis – all of them ACTUALLY have no substance. They all have a uniform and some of them a learned ideology that comes close to a religion. Some like Frankenstein cling to the medals and dressups – for the others their uniform is just a cloak.
    The most genuine are those just trying to get on with their daily lives.
    It’s all the fastest route to 3rd World status

  2. kini Says:

    Vinaka Tim…you’ve just said it all and furthermore these bunch of bastards are no leaders like Helen Clark.
    She at least, respect the law of the land and when defeated fairly by the peoples ballots, bows out gracefully and allow the Prime Minister elect, to step in and take over, the administration of the country.
    Unlike the bunch of bastards, we have in Fiji’s military dictatorship, who would illegally usurped power from our constitutionally elected Government, so they can continue their Father Legacy and Kanaloto.
    What a sorry bunch of bastards!!!!!

  3. Tim Says:

    @Kini – It’s pomp and circumstance, except the circumstance ain’t that great and it’s getting worse. What’s left? Colonial inspired pomp, which seems kind of apt while we all acknowledge Armistace/Remembrance Day. Strange that the junta’s supporters are the ones that so readily accuse their detractors of neo-colonialism. They’re all their own worst enemy, so let em all self implode – even if it is as Mark predicts – on economic grounds.
    The RFMF is a fC*king disgrace to its tradition – let alone a sizeable portion of its membership lolling around learning how to become fat slobs at the expense of those that pay taxes and try to work out where their next meal is coming from; Gates and Pryde just as big a disgrace (maybe one day they’ll realise its the 21st Century just as most of their contemporaries are busy denying they ever knew them); and Shaista just has her peon out busily trying to score for her while cosily tucked up in her whare thinking people actually give her any credence.
    I find it really quite amusing. Here are all these fcukwits telling the rest of the world – especially the Pacforum countries how hard done by they are and that the travel bans are bad bad bad – Oh Oh Oh, they’re just all preventing us from “moving forward” – we SO need to travel so we can move Fiji (the way the World should be) forward.
    The neighbours are being mean and just being assholes!.
    So WHY???? are they so eagre to have travel bans lifted so they can travel there or transit them? Could it be that they have personal interests there? Australia/NZ/other Pac Nations have ALL exressed their desire to engage – even support – even FINANCE a return to normality. But none of them are going to pay to be told by the likes of Frank Bainimarama or his ilk that he thinks they’re assholes and they’re sure as hell not gonna lift travel bans so he can come tell them in person. (Actually they probably would do that, but Frank wouldn’t have the guts as he’s already shown [Tonga] – because the man is actually a coward).
    Oh Please NZ: lift your travel ban so I can come and tell you that I think Helen Clark is a bitch. Oh please Australia/NZ, lift your travel ban so Yippe or Shaista or any other of my supporters can come see how our whanau are doing – well Frank’n’co we know they’ve been voting in elections and receiving income support benefits and receiving the very status you deny everyone else in Fiji because you think you know better!
    Sorry Frank – I really don’t think so – not even a change of government will entertain that.

  4. Striker Says:

    Yes Tim, I agree, not even a change of govt will change the views of the USA, Australia and New Zealand. A coup is a coup is a coup, legalised by a kangaroo court judgement or whatever. Specially so, when Helen Clark is now directly responsible for Foreign Affairs in NZ. Take heart democracy fighters, we are not alone!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: