Prime Minister Christopher Luxon (right) with senior ministers Chris Bishop (from left), Nicolas Willis and Simeon Brown. Photo / Alex Burton
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is secure in his leadership of the National Party. But what would happen if he were suddenly unable to serve? The caucus could choose stability – or dramatic change.
The last two sudden departures of Prime Ministers in office, Sir John Key and Dame Jacinda Ardern, were meticulously planned by each of them before their resignations.
That included a succession plan of who was to replace them.
But what would happen if the Prime Minister suddenly fell under a bus or down a crevasse?
Who would take over as National Party leader and Prime Minister?
Would it automatically fall to his deputy leader and Finance Minister Nicola Willis? Would her close political ally and friend Chris Bishop be encouraged by others in the caucus to fill the vacancy? Or would someone else, such as Simeon Brown or Erica Stanford, seek the top spot?
There is no suggestion that Luxon’s leadership is in trouble or that anybody is seeking to roll him.
But it is not uncommon to speculate on future leaders.
In Helen Clark’s first term as Prime Minister, as she was preparing for an intrepid icy expedition, a reporter asked her who she thought would take over if she fell down a crevasse.
Surprisingly enough, she answered the question. She did not suggest her Labour deputy, Sir Michael Cullen, but offered up Education Minister Trevor Mallard.
At the time, Mallard was the equivalent of Jim Bolger’s Mr Fix-it, Sir Bill Birch, and Key’s Everything Minister, Steven Joyce. But in each successive year of the Fifth Labour Government, Cullen’s stocks grew and by the second term, there would have been no doubt he would have filled any unforeseen vacancy.
When Ardern privately decided to leave office at the end of 2022, her close political partner, deputy leader and Finance Minister Grant Robertson did not want the job. Chris Hipkins took little persuasion by them that he would be the next best to lead the party into the 2023 election.
The Willis-Bishop partnership has some similarities with the Ardern-Robertson one.
Both were forged as political advisers before entering politics, and both have become the most influential politicians of their generation.
While Ardern eventually attained the senior role, in reality they were partners of equal influence in Government and in the party.
Willis and Bishop also have equal influence. Willis began as the senior of the two, having started in the National Party Opposition research unit in 2003, the year Sir Bill English was dumped as leader by Don Brash.
English put his head down and worked intensively on education policy. By the time Key became leader in 2006, Willis had been identified as a big talent. She worked for Key, including on his efforts to establish social policy credentials in his McGehan Close speech.
She also famously helped Key to practise for leaders’ debates in the 2008 campaign by standing in as “Helen Clark” and had to be asked to stop because she was crushing it, and Key’s confidence. By then, Bishop had joined the research unit as well, but Willis was the senior.
When Key became Prime Minister in 2008, it was a natural move for her to become one of his senior advisers, despite her being only 27 at the time.
Bishop, by then aged 25, became a ministerial adviser to Gerry Brownlee in the first term but, in what can easily be described as an error of judgment, went on to become a tobacco company lobbyist, returning to the Beehive to work as a ministerial adviser to Steven Joyce.
Bishop was elected to Parliament in 2014, three years before Willis. Like Bishop, she had also sought business experience, but more sensibly with Fonterra, not a tobacco company.
That epitomises the pair of them. He is rough around the edges, more free-wheeling, spontaneous and flawed. She is more buttoned-down, more rehearsed and more focused on political management.
Authentic is a word often used to describe him. But Bishop gets into trouble more often than Willis – for example, his most recent controversy over saying “what a lot of crap” at what he saw as the politicisation of Stan Walker’s contribution at the Aotearoa Music Awards.
As Leader of the House, he is often forced to work collaboratively with MPs from other parties. Her default position is viscerally combative.
Importantly, he is more popular among Government MPs than Willis.
She is seen as a high-achieving, a perfectionist, someone who thinks things through. She is also highly ambitious, sometimes to the detriment of building relationships with colleagues, and also has to make unpopular decisions as Finance Minister.
She first stood in 2017, was elected from the list in 2018 and just under four years later, was invited by Luxon to be his deputy.
Luxon’s mentor, Key, had helped Willis with her candidacy in 2017 and appeared in a video before the election in which he said: “I personally think she could be the leader of the National party, and the leader of the country one day. I rate her as the most impressive candidate I’ve seen ... ”
Perhaps it was that endorsement that gave her the confidence as a first-term MP to get deeply involved in the plot to replace leader Simon Bridges with Todd Muller in 2020. Both she and Bishop were in donkey deep. After most of the other protagonists retired in 2020, she and Bishop carried much of the blame from the Bridges loyalists for the disastrous electoral consequences.
When Luxon replaced Judith Collins a year later, his choice of Willis as deputy helped to diminish the resentment towards her. But in the end, it was her and Bishop’s own efforts as top caucus performers that sealed it, including Bishop’s role as campaign chair in 2023.
And while she may have had seniority over Bishop in theory when they entered Government due to her role in finance and as deputy leader, his stocks have risen since then.
His workload is prodigious, his reform agenda is immense, his relationships with coalition partners is strong, he performs well publicly, and despite his flaws, or perhaps because of them, he connects well with people, including the caucus.
That is why right now, despite Willis having been groomed for the role, having highly influential patrons, and being respected for her achievements, Bishop would likely have the edge to successfully fill any leadership vacancy if he wanted it.
Being loyal friends, it is unlikely either would openly challenge the other, but it would not be too difficult to find out which one had more support among colleagues.
The other person who couldn’t be entirely discounted in the bus scenario would be Erica Stanford.
She is doing very well as Education Minister, a notoriously difficult portfolio for National ministers, and is said to be making it clear she considers herself to have future prospects.
But she would be a greater risk in terms of wider political management and strategy than Bishop or Willis, who have lived and breathed it for years.
Under the bus scenario, the outcome could depend on how National was polling at the time. If it were doing very well, that would favour Bishop or Willis as candidates for stability and continuity.
If it were polling very badly, that might favour a riskier contender such as Stanford, who might have public appeal, if not caucus appeal.
A Stanford leadership would almost certainly suit Act and NZ First, because she would not have the business and rural credentials that Bishop or Willis are gaining. She would therefore leave more space for those parties to draw that vote next time around.
But in a more likely scenario, if Bishop were the leader, Stanford could be his deputy, and Willis could remain in Finance.
Health Minister Simeon Brown is the other minister worth considering, but not as a leader, yet. A highly political and competent minister, he is a darling of the wider party, but at age 34, he has time on his side.
If Bishop did not want the leadership and Willis were the leader, Simeon Brown could be her deputy, and Bishop could be the Finance Minister.
An even bolder option, the one that would muster a certain excitement, would be Willis as leader, Stanford as deputy and Bishop as Finance Minister.
Again, it is the sort of novel combination that would only be contemplated if the party needed rescuing at the time the leader fell under the bus.
National does not sweat the gender and geographical balance stuff in the same way Labour does. And while there has usually and ideally been a liberal and conservative blend in the leadership team, it has not always been strictly adhered to.
Political competence and promise would ultimately trump all else if unforeseen events created a vacancy.