Editorial: Anderton learning to be a pragmatist

Jim Anderton would doubtless blanch at being described as a pragmatist. The description is most often conferred upon conservative politicians, usually to distinguish them from ideologues. Yet pragmatism was at the core of Mr Anderton's message to the Alliance's weekend conference. Supporters, he said, had to be realistic about what a 7.74 per cent party could deliver as the junior member of a coalition Government. To delegates who thought the Alliance could achieve more by disagreeing more strongly with Labour, his terse response was "get a life."

What Mr Anderton was saying, in effect, was that the critics did not understand the complexities and constraints of government. They did not realise how much work was necessary to keep the coalition functioning smoothly. Put another way, the Alliance leader has learned after almost a year in power what is possible - and what is not.

This new-found pragmatism is not confined to recognising the limits of power. It extends to policy. Encouragingly, Mr Anderton appears willing to compromise, if not walk away from, Alliance mantras in the interests of promoting economic growth. There was talk not of the Alliance's policy of universal free tertiary education, but of targeting special subjects. Advanced science and engineering were the suggested guinea-pigs for free education.

"We need to be the very best at some things, not merely average at a lot," he said. If that did not gobsmack Alliance ideologues, Mr Anderton could have been parroting the Business Roundtable when he talked about turning the education system into a "world-class centre for excellence." Not that he stopped there. Words such as nationalisation were not helpful, he said when the conference turned to the issue of Tranz Rail. "Who is running around nationalising anybody?" So much for delegates clinging to socialist ideology that in an egalitarian and classless society, industry should be held in trust for all the people by the state.

Underpinning Mr Anderton's realism is the desire to be seen as a sensible and constructive coalition partner. His is a difficult balancing act. There are dangers that the Alliance will be perceived as blurring into Labour. This was the fate of New Zealand First after Winston Peters, who, similarly, breathed fire in opposition, became a realistic and relatively responsible junior coalition partner. New Zealand First failed to distance itself from National as a party. Potential supporters did not recognise or were not impressed by initiatives such as free medicine for children regardless of parental income. It did not help, of course, that National sought to share the "credit"for such policies.

Opinion polls highlight an ominously similar problem for the Alliance. Some conference delegates were undoubtedly seeking to impress upon Mr Anderton the need for the party to differentiate itself, to persuade him to turn away from pragmatism and diluted policies and stake out the ideological distinction expected of a party at the left of the political spectrum. They would have been cheered by Laila Harre's pledge to fight for paid parental leave and telecommunications regulations.

Mr Anderton maintains, of course, that the Alliance's core policies of full employment and free health and education are intact. The strong dose of realpolitik swallowed by all governing parties has, however, produced a commendable flexibility of approach. New Zealand stands to benefit from the stable government and sense of priority emphasised by Mr Anderton. Will that, however, be at the Alliance's own expense?