John Armstrong: Brash's party putsch pathetic

Is Don Brash the man to lead the National Party out of the wilderness? Is this political neophyte up to the job?

Judging from his behaviour during the pathetic putsch against Bill English, the answer is: not yet.

It is not a crime to crave the leadership. Brash's blunder was to say so publicly without having the killer instinct to confront the current enfeebled leader and topple him.

As the Prime Minister observed, National is now in the worst of all possible worlds.

The declared challenger was unwilling to challenge; the kneecapped leader hobbles on; the question lingers.

Still, the upshot is that English has secured more time to try to lift his game. Presumably, that was not the intention of those plotting to get rid of him.

That Brash naively or deliberately mused aloud about his own prospects has reinforced the notion that the novice politician is still in serious deficit in terms of political nous.

That is certainly the view of a chunk of National MPs in the "give Bill more time" camp whom Brash must win over when his supporters mount a more serious challenge.

Which looks an inevitability.

The coup that wasn't has stalled the mild momentum National was starting to generate around issues such as Treaty rights, welfare reform and the power shortage.

At long last, English and his front bench were starting to set the agenda. National's poll rating was creeping upwards.

Now the party is bracing itself for a large hit in the polls, which will prompt further speculation about the leadership. Brash is not getting a lot of thanks for that.

This self-fulfilling prophecy is not the only thing working against English. He has bruised egos in his caucus conspiring against him - people he demoted but who cannot see that was done for the greater good of the party.

Then there are the panic merchants who think National was too slow in changing its leader before the last election.

More fundamental is the clash over the party's positioning. Brash is the figurehead of those who want to push National to the right, English is centrist by inclination.

However, English is being dragged to the right by a caucus that has a preponderance of Auckland MPs who seem to want to craft policy that will enable National to win the likes of affluent North Shore, Epsom and Tamaki - seats the party already holds.

There is little moderating influence in the caucus from provincial city MPs who would speak for middle New Zealand, such was the scale of National's defeat last year.

Yet, as English is well aware, it is this territory that National must win back.

That is why he was so reluctant to commit National to backing the American-led invasion of Iraq.

He might have been accurate in his reading of public opinion. In caucus eyes, he was slow and hesitant, prompting MPs to contrast him with the highly focused Brash.

As finance spokesman and chair of the party's policy review, Brash has brought an energy and drive to caucus deliberations.

As former Reserve Bank governor, his mere presence strengthens National's "brand" in terms of economic policy.

While his decisive style may be beguiling new and like-minded colleagues, the danger is that Brash drives National into a dead-end street of deregulatory, hands-off policies that even free-marketeers such as Max Bradford and Maurice Williamson sought to reverse out of in the late 1990s.

Ignoring this potentially catastrophic strategic miscalculation, the party leadership is a quantum leap. That applies to even the most experienced of MPs, let alone someone whose parliamentary career stretches all of nine months.

It might be different were Brash being lined up to go straight into the prime ministership, where a safe pair of hands is an essential credential.

Being Leader of the Opposition requires an ability to capture the public imagination, while endlessly chipping away at the Government to gradually erode its standing.

That is not to say Brash is not capable of playing hard ball politics, it is just that in his short time in the parliamentary chamber he has appeared more the onlooker than active participant.

That has been deliberate. National has wanted to safeguard an extremely valuable asset from making mistakes while he learns on the job.

No such luxury could be afforded the leader, who is at constant risk of making mistakes by having to make snap tactical judgments across a gamut of issues. Even seasoned politicians such as Jim Bolger and Helen Clark found being Opposition leader hard going.

Brash should not be deluded by the easy ride he is getting from opponents and the media.

He got off lightly when he suggested the unemployed assemble outside post offices each morning to be allocated temporary jobs in return for cash payments at the end of each day.

The blowtorch would have been applied had such an impractical idea come from English.

In the end, National MPs will assess who should be leader by weighing up four factors: intellect, political judgment, presentation and popular appeal.

In terms of brainpower, little separates English and Brash.

When it comes to political instinct, English is the winner. He has the experience, can soak up the pressure and dish it out both to opponents and errant colleagues. Brash is untested.

On presentation, Brash is the winner. His silky media skills make his messages uncluttered pictures of clarity. Despite copious media training, English sounds fuzzy, reinforcing the impression of National not knowing what it stands for.

When it comes to popular appeal, English is now typecast as weak and indecisive.

Brash is short on charisma, but conveys authority and integrity.

While this liberal-minded free-marketeer may appeal to Act voters, National needs someone who can attract back the moral conservatives who flocked to New Zealand First and United Future - something English is trying to do.

New Zealanders also like a bit of "aggro" to be lurking in their leaders.

Installing Gentleman Don might merely add to the list of gentleman politicians, such as Sir Geoffrey Palmer and Sir John Marshall, who were disastrous leaders.

Such reservations may be academic, however. The key question is whether English can rescue himself.

Presuming he doesn't, National MPs will simply have to take one of the biggest gambles in their party's history.