National Party leader Christopher Luxon ordered up diversity. Photo / Mike Scott
OPINION
National leader Christopher Luxon’s call for the party members to inject some diversity into selections clearly did the trick – putting it into a diversity-or-bust mode for the Hamilton West byelection.
It resulted in some almost comical twists to the selection for Hamilton West – twists that will be making other white man hopefuls lining up for National nervous.
Luxon’s credibility was on the line – his earlier, milder suggestion that the Tauranga byelection might deliver diversity was completely ignored. He lost a Māori MP in Simon Bridges, and the shortlist was four white men.
This time the party didn’t want to take any risks of a repeat, so the party appeared to decide the only surefire way to ensure diversity in Hamilton West was to remove all temptation of a white, male candidate completely.
In its effect, it is perilously close to the territory of Labour’s proposed 2013 “man ban.” That was a proposal to only allow women to stand in some electorates. It was controversial and then-leader David Shearer dumped it, and Labour toned it down to a more general, longer-term target (it now has more than 50 per cent women).
National’s Hamilton West equivalent would be the “white-man ban” – the party had quiet words and took out the two white male candidates.
Within a week of Luxon’s statement, one of the two white men looking at the seat decided not to stand. That was former MP Tim Macindoe, who up until that moment had wanted to return and could have rightly expected to have a good chance.
He made it easy for National – Andrew King should have read the signs but it was a few more days before news trickled out that King too was out of contention.
Lo! The party delegates now have no choice other than some diversity – two women, one of whom is Pasifika, or a Māori man. On paper, all three seem suitable and may have even conquered the white men. But National was clearly not willing to take the risk of how the party members might vote.
All this focus on diversity – to the point of leaving white males out - will make some of the National Party base squirm. So-called identity politics is supposed to be Labour’s game.
But Luxon is not simply trying to tick some diversity box.
The reason Luxon has put to bed that old “merit-based only” rhetoric is because he wants to become a Prime Minister.
He can almost smell the win. But getting that job means getting every vote you can, and that means putting up a team that actually looks a bit like the voters themselves in all their diverse glory.
National used to have more of that than Labour.
But in current National Party terms, the definition of “diversity” is “anybody who is not a white, straight male.” National has an abundance of white, straight males. It has precious little of any other demographic. It is massively under-represented in women and Māori, and has no Pasifika or rainbow MPs at all.
It has long claimed to select its candidates based on merit (a boast that does not necessarily stand the test given a number of white, male candidates chosen on the merit-based theory in recent years have proved to be anything but meritorious).
It is to Luxon’s credit that he has openly set out his request for the party faithful to deliver diversity – and more to his credit that he has spoken of unconscious bias in the party’s selections, a factor that overcomes the “merit” analysis.
The challenge he now faces is delivering on the words.
Luxon has repeatedly claimed National does have a vast array of impressive women, Māori and others putting their hands up for selection for 2023.
The NZ Herald was told that over the last week or so, there were 21 confirmed nominees across seven selections – and only four of those 21 were white men.
That may be the case, but it is completely irrelevant if they are not actually selected.
In some cases, they have been – Māori candidates were selected in the very winnable seats of Rangitata (James Meager) and New Plymouth (David MacLeod).
But the selection in Ilam on Sunday was a case in point: the five shortlisted candidates included Māori, gay, and women. One was a straight white male.
The winner (after four rounds of voting) was the straight, white male, Hamish Campbell. He posed for his photo in the blue suit that could have been borrowed from the Tauranga shortlist wardrobe.
Another test will be in Upper Harbour, where the shortlist of five also has one white male – Cameron Brewer – up against former MP Parmjeet Parmar, and three other women. That is a less conservative electorate than Ilam, and so the result may differ.
Some electorates may well think delivering on diversity should be either left to the list or to another electorate, not them.
Yes, the list process can be used – and National would not be in such a dire state if it had got a better election result in 2020. Other than Melissa Lee, most ethnic candidates missed out because they were below the list cut-off for National’s result.
But it is also because of those ranked above them on the list. The rankings meant that of the nine list MPs National got in 2020, seven were men (six were white men). One (Nick Smith) has since been replaced by a Māori woman, Harete Hipango.
Some of them are almost guaranteed to keep their high rankings for 2020 – they include Gerry Brownlee, Chris Bishop, and Paul Goldsmith, who gets a high ranking as consolation for having to only pretend to campaign in Epsom against David Seymour.
National’s current problem is not one of Luxon’s making: he was bequeathed the selections and list rankings overseen by former leader Judith Collins and former President Peter Goodfellow. He is clearly sick of defending something he had nothing to do with, beyond standing himself.
Luxon has promised to do better on the list this time round if the electorates don’t deliver.