Some New Zealand prime ministers have excelled. Others haven’t. The Listener asked three historians to rank the 23 who held office for any length of time since our first ‘official’ PM. The results might surprise.
Who was the best prime minister in New Zealand history? Who was the worst? And who coasted along in the middle, not doing very much but not making mistakes? The good, the bad, the indifferent …
Such compilations are a popular sport in the United States. Abraham Lincoln, George Washington and Franklin Roosevelt almost always get the top three spots. US President-elect Donald Trump is often at or near the bottom, down among leaders who mismanaged the lead-up to and the aftermath of the Civil War.
Comparisons are less common in this country. So the Listener sought to fill the gap. Officially, we’ve had 42 leaders (including the current one). The first elected officials did not get off to an auspicious start – Henry Sewell lasted barely two weeks, as did his successor, William Fox (although he made three more appearances as premier in 1861, 1869 and 1873). The longest term in office is 13 years, set by Richard “King Dick” Seddon.
We invited three historians with an interest in political history – Michael Bassett, Erik Olssen and Jim McAloon – to rank prime ministers, starting with Seddon, who was in the chair from May 1, 1893 until his death on June 10, 1906.
Why start with Seddon? He was officially our first prime minister – a title he took halfway through his rule. Leaders from 1856-99 were “premiers”. It could be argued, too, that Seddon led a nation, rather than managing a colonial outpost.
Chronologically, our list concludes with Chris Hipkins, as Christopher Luxon is still in office.
The historians were asked to rank each PM out of 10 on three criteria – leadership, economic management and legacy – and give an aggregate ranking.
It was a difficult task. Some prime ministers, such as Geoffrey Palmer, achieved little during their leadership but had made a big impact as cabinet ministers earlier. A similar argument would apply to Walter Nash. Others, like Jim Bolger, were capable but battled continuously against difficult ministers. And some, like Keith Holyoake, were lucky, due to the quiet prosperity of their years in office.
All three historians praised Peter Fraser for multiple qualities: his stewardship of Labour after the death of Michael Joseph Savage, his solid leadership during World War II, his push to establish the United Nations and the social programmes before and after the war. All ranked Fraser top on aggregate.
At the other end, Robert Muldoon is condemned for his authoritarian ways, his reluctance to take advice and his cancellation of a contributory superannuation scheme in the great Decca-turns-down-The-Beatles moment of New Zealand history.
As expected, Seddon is high on the list, although modern eyes might find fault with his cheerful imperialism and his blithe support for the Boer War. But he produced serious reforms, ran the economy well and led a stable government for 13 years.
The World War I leader William Massey also rates highly, even though generations of leftists would condemn the use of “Massey’s Cossacks” to suppress striking workers in 1913. But Massey somehow kept the country under stable leadership, despite the horrors and cruelty of the war.
Helen Clark rates highly; John Key and Jacinda Ardern not so much. Four leaders were excluded from the list because of political brevity: William Hall-Jones (six weeks in 1906), Thomas Mackenzie (barely three months in 1912), Francis Dillon Bell (16 days in 1925), and Mike Moore (two months), who in 1990 watched over the grisly end of the fourth Labour government like an ineffectual courtier dropped into the last scene of Hamlet and told to do something about it.
Other politicians, such as Joseph Ward and Norman Kirk, fare well in the list, but Hipkins does badly. In last place, again unanimously, is George Forbes, leader during the first part of the Great Depression.
The historians were also asked to give two special awards. One is the Aurelian Prize for quick-fire achievements. This is named after the brilliant but short-lived Roman emperor who reunited the empire and reformed the economy in a few short years.
At the other end is the Calvin Coolidge Award, which recognises prolonged inactivity. This is named after “Silent Cal”, who spent five years in the White House marking time while the seeds of the Depression began to sprout.
Bassett and Olssen awarded the Aurelian Prize to David Lange (McAloon didn’t award one). Bassett and McAloon awarded the Calvin Coolidge award to George Forbes. Olssen gave it to Keith Holyoake.
The judges
Dr Michael Bassett is a historian and former politician who has written a comparison of prime ministers from Seddon to Key, as well as biographies of Peter Fraser, Joseph Ward and Gordon Coates. Rankings in blue.
Dr Erik Olssen is professor emeritus of history at the University of Otago. He has written at length about New Zealand’s cultural and social history, including the landmark Caversham research project. He wrote a biography of the Labour Party rebel John A Lee and a history of the early days of the trade union movement. Rankings in purple.
Dr Jim McAloon is professor of history at Victoria University of Wellington Te Herenga Waka. He co-authored a history of the New Zealand Labour Party from its inception, a history of economic policy-making after World War II, and a range of scholarly articles on New Zealand’s economic and social history. Rankings in orange.
The rankings
DR MICHAEL BASSETT
1. PETER FRASER 1940-1949
He was a very clever Scotsman from the Highlands and was an excellent Minister of Education before becoming Prime Minister in 1940. He was a strong leader throughout World War II and was respected and trusted by Churchill. He made a stunning contribution to the foundation of the United Nations and is possibly the biggest single figure in the creation of New Zealand’s welfare state.
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 10
2. RICHARD JOHN SEDDON 1893-1906
A wily politician who established the Liberals as the dominant force in New Zealand politics for two decades. He became Prime Minister 1893 and won five elections, becoming New Zealand’s longest-serving PM. He brought in welfare reforms like the old-age pension, helped New Zealand recover from the depression of the 1880s and presided over growing prosperity on all fronts. Large in stature and status.
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 10
3. WILLIAM MASSEY 1912-1925
Massey came from Northern Ireland, entered NZ farming politics, and was a key figure in the development of the Reform Party, which became the main opposition party to the Liberals. He led New Zealand throughout WWI, which was a very difficult and tragic time. He was very good for farmers, supported freeholding their leasehold land. He also presided over a strong economy, despite the strains of war.
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY 8 LEGACY: 8
4. HELEN CLARK 1999-2008
She was undoubtedly the most important woman leader that this country has ever had. She had early associations with health reforms and a Nuclear Free New Zealand before becoming leader. She had the advantage of Michael Cullen as Finance Minister who ran surpluses and tried to safeguard the future with the NZ Super Fund and KiwiSaver. She was a very tough leader. The Labour Party is always very hard to control but she knew every wrinkle.
LEADERSHIP 10 ECONOMY 8 LEGACY 8
5. MICHAEL JOSEPH SAVAGE 1935-1940
He was the man who gave New Zealanders hope in the depth of the Great Depression. People would crowd around him, after election night in 1935, just wanting to touch him. He was re-elected overwhelmingly in 1938. He was the real father of the Welfare State. Peter Fraser and his Finance Minister Walter Nash did a lot of the work, but Savage gave people hope. He picked good lieutenants and his management was inspirational.
LEADERSHIP 8 ECONOMY 8 LEGACY 10
6. JOSEPH WARD 1906-1912 and 1928-1930
He succeeded Richard Seddon after a brief interregnum and kept the Liberals in power for six more years. He presided over a period of prosperity and used some of that money to provide assistance to settlers. He lost out to William Massey in a dispute over leasehold vs freehold land for farmers. He struggled to maintain Liberal support in the towns against an infant Labour Party. Ward holds the longevity record of 23 years as a cabinet minister but was less successful as prime minister. His second prime ministership was poor.
LEADERSHIP 6 ECONOMY 8 LEGACY 8
7. DAVID LANGE 1984-1989
He was silver-tonged and very talented. He was a splendid orator with a winning turn of phrase and a stunning capacity to master a brief. But he was reluctant to concentrate on any one task for very long, and he sometimes quit meetings early. He presided over the most extraordinary economic reforms of New Zealand history. He facilitated those changes but then collapsed. He was ill on and off from 1986 onwards and came close to being tipped out as Prime Minister before he resigned.
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY 10 LEGACY 8
8. JIM BOLGER 1990-1997
He had an independent streak. His broad-church leadership allowed Ruth Richardson to be Minister of Finance, and she was Roger Douglas on stilts. But he turned her out when he almost lost the next election. He was a victim of MMP. He had to drop ministers to make room for NZ First, and the dumped party members replied by tossing him out. He was a cautious man, who sometimes quoted President Truman: “Never kick a fresh turd on a hot day.” This meant, don’t do anything you don’t have to do because it will get messy.
LEADERSHIP 8 ECONOMY 6 LEGACY 6
9. KEITH HOLYOAKE Sept 1957-Dec 1957; 1960-1972
He was the only person apart from Joseph Ward to be PM twice. His leadership was very strict. He insisted on getting letters of resignation from all cabinet ministers and keeping them in a top drawer in case they were needed. He was clever and tough but left little impression from his long years in office. “Steady as she goes” was his motto. He spent all the money he had, leaving no cash accumulation for a crisis. He had something in common with John Key – both whiled away their time trying to keep the other guy out of power.
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY 8 LEGACY 6
10. WALTER NASH 1957-1960
He had a ground-breaking career as Minister of Finance in the Savage / Fraser Government, but would procrastinate as Prime Minister. His modus operandi was legendary. If a decision could be put off, then he put it off. So, the tables in his office groaned under the weight of files that were awaiting decisions. When he went overseas, officials would race in and get stuck into the “cemetery” of unattended files, fish out the “bodies” and hand them on the appropriate ministers for action. His term is mainly remembered for the “Black Budget” of 1958.
LEADERSHIP 6 ECONOMY 7 LEGACY: 7
11. SID HOLLAND 1949-1957
Holland came from conservative Methodist stock, joined a right-wing group in 1920s and was a special constable in the 30s. He was “tough as old boots” and engaged an equally tough Labour Minister, who crushed the watersiders during a landmark industrial dispute in 1951. He was a “practical man of action, not given to contemplation”, according to a colleague, Jack Marshall. His stewardship of the economy was confusing and he lost his memory in the end. His main legacy was an extremely tough attitude to unions, which the National Party stuck with for decades.
LEADERSHIP 6 ECONOMY 7 LEGACY: 6
12. NORMAN KIRK 1972-1974
He was a strong leader who could be quite intimidating to rank and file and cabinet ministers. He could shout and roar to very good effect but had a soft side. He was a leader who could inspire and frighten. His running of the economy was not great, he spent a lot of money and would accuse his Minister of Finance Bill Rowling of being a tight wad. His main legacy was a sense of optimism, but he only governed for 21 months, 15 of them in good health.
LEADERSHIP 7 ECONOMY 6 LEGACY 7
13. GORDON COATES 1925-1928
He was not a very good Prime Minister but was an interesting man. He was a decorated soldier in World War I and led the Reform Party after the death of William Massey. In 1925, he won a big election victory under slogan, “Coats off with Coates”. He had low-grade cabinet ministers and made foolish decisions, including trying to control the price of export butter. He did better as Finance Minister in a subsequent government when he established the Reserve Bank
LEADERSHIP 6 ECONOMY 6 LEGACY 4
14. BILL ENGLISH 2016-2017
He led National to a terrible result in 2002, and then came back as Finance Minister under John Key. He was a competent minister without being a great reformer. In fact, there was not a reforming bone in his body. He was a typical National Party man. In the 2017 election, he got a good share of the vote and was really beaten by Winston Peters. There was nothing great about his leadership, but he was a fairly sensible pair of hands on the wheel.
LEADERSHIP 7 ECONOMY 6 LEGACY 6
15. JOHN KEY 2008-2016
He was competent, and could keep the show on the road, but he had no spark of radicalism. He failed in promising, in 2008, to make the New Zealand economy perform as well as Australia. He set up an advisory group to make that happen but dropped them when he did not like their recommendations. He was not a particularly well-informed person, least of all about New Zealand history, and he coasted along at the expense of his legacy.
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY 6 LEGACY 2
16. GEOFFREY PALMER 1989-1990
He was very important as David Lange’s sidekick. Lange would throw a bundle of papers in the corner after he’d given a rollicking speech, and Palmer would pick them up and sort them out and do the follow-up work. He was very much the theoretician, and that got him into trouble. There was a substantial faction in the Labour caucus that never liked it much and did not trust his judgment on the economy. David Caygill was his Minister of Finance and he was competent.
LEADERSHIP 5 ECONOMY 8 LEGACY 2
17. JENNY SHIPLEY 1997-1999
She was a very impressive speaker who could rattle the rafters. She was very deft in helping to undermine Bolger in 1997. As Prime Minister, she struggled to hold her numbers together in parliament, particularly when she fired Winston Peters. She managed to hang on but was not very spectacular in terms of her achievements. She pressed on with a few things, such as the electricity reforms, but in terms of her legacy, there is not very much.
LEADERSHIP 5 ECONOMY 6 LEGACY 4
18. BILL ROWLING 1974-1975
He inherited the mantle when Norman Kirk died. He experienced the onset of recession, started running up a deficit and was badly defeated in 1975. Rob Muldoon ran rings around him, with cruel descriptions such as “a shiver looking for a spine to run up.” In the end he did not have too many qualities as a leader, though he did his best after Kirk died. These days, you would be hard-pressed to find people who remember him.
LEADERSHIP 5 ECONOMY 5 LEGACY 2
19. JACK MARSHALL Feb 1972-Dec 1972
He had a charming, old-world manner. He impressed quickly and became a minister under Sid Holland and a deputy leader under Keith Holyoake. He did well on foreign trade. When he became leader, he was always outshone by the ogre who was his deputy, in the form of Rob Muldoon. Muldoon made sure that Marshall never really got much of a look-in. He lost the election in 1972, then Muldoon toppled him in 1974, so there was not much time to establish himself as captain.
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY 2 LEGACY 4
20. ROB MULDOON 1975-1984
He was a bright man but a strange one. He beHe He elieved in the use of the state, big time. He was both PM and Minister of Finance and ran a one-man band. Decisions were made by him alone. He weakened the economy by borrowing huge sums of money for energy schemes that became a heavy burden. Inflation raced away and he tried to control this by regulation, which was an unmitigated disaster. He could be very unkind to people who crossed him and was in fact a nasty piece of work.
LEADERSHIP 3 ECONOMY 1 LEGACY: 1
21. JACINDA ARDERN 2017-2023
Her style of operation appealed to people who liked the slogan of “be nice and be kind”. But her leadership was weak and her knowledge of Labour’s history and achievements was almost non-existent. Some people praise her response to the Covid crisis, but the price of those lockdowns is still being paid. Her management of the economy was very poor, she spent unbelievable sums of money. Most people think of her as the nice lady who was the Prime Minister of New Zealand. But her leadership was not very good and she just threw away money.
LEADERSHIP 4 ECONOMY 2 LEGACY 1
22. CHRIS HIPKINS Jan 2023-Oct 2023
He was Mr Patch Up, after the rule of Jacinda Ardern. He had earlier had several cabinet roles but by the time he became Prime Minister, his ministry started to fall apart, with several ministers leaving. He was poor on the economy – he was in the hands of his Finance Minister Grant Robertson. About his legacy, he has to wear some of the blame, but a substantial part of the responsibility lies with Ardern, due to the vast amount of cash that was spent, with little value for money.
LEADERSHIP 2 ECONOMY 1 LEGACY 1
23. GEORGE FORBES 1930-1935
He is bottom of the list. He was popular in farming circles but was a hands-off Prime Minister. Much of the hard work during the depression was done by his minister, Gordon Coates. Forbes took little interest in his ministers’ work. The story leaked out that during the depression that Forbes went to the movies twice a week. He was a hands-off operator but benefited from Coates setting up the Reserve Bank and giving mortgage relief to farmers. Forbes never had any initiatives of his own to offset the enormous hardship felt by ordinary people.
LEADERSHIP 1 ECONOMY 4 LEGACY 0
EXTRAS
MIKE MOORE Sep 1990-November 1990
He was in power for under two months. He was a great conversationalist and could be rollicking good fun. He had some very strange ideas on industrial relations but achieved a lot as
ERIK OLSSEN
The following is my list of the best and worst Prime Ministers, ranked one to 23. Beside them are the rankings on the grounds of leadership, the economy and legacy, 1-10. I have put them into groups.
1. PETER FRASER
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 10 LEGACY: 10
2. BILL MASSEY
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 10 LEGACY: 10
3. DICK SEDDON
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 10 LEGACY: 10
4. JIM BOLGER
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 10 LEGACY: 10
Except for Fraser who only won two, each of these PMs won at least three general elections (Seddon winning five). Each oversaw a major initiative in economic policy, and except for Seddon each showed great capacity for appointing able cabinet ministers. I’ve not given much weight to foreign policy as they confronted such different challenges, but Massey and Fraser were outstanding. One could argue that Bolger’s role in securing MMP should give him the nod, however
5. HELEN CLARK
A strong leader but there are question marks over her decision to deal with NZ First and keep the Greens at arm’s length as well as the Foreshore and Seabed fiasco. Full marks for the trade deal with China. As the first woman to lead a party to electoral victory she will always be sui generis; and the fact that she won three general elections (under MMP) makes her the most successful Labour leader ever.
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 8
6. MICKY SAVAGE
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 10
7. DAVID LANGE
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 10
8. JOSEPH WARD
LEADERSHIP: 7 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 8
All won two elections but also saw the disintegration of their victorious coalitions. Savage and Lange had charisma and used it to advance important causes – the welfare state for Savage and a nuclear-free foreign policy for Lange. Savage was a shrewder and more-capable politician, but both appointed some very able ministers to key portfolios. Ward joins them because of several major policy contributions over 52 years of public service, including two terms as Prime Minister (1908-11, 1928-30).
9. NORMAN KIRK
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 7 LEGACY: 10
10. KEITH HOLYOAKE
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 8
11. SID HOLLAND
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 7
12. WALTER NASH
LEADERSHIP: 7 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 2
13 GORDON COATES
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 8
14. BILL ENGLISH
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 6
15. JOHN KEY
LEADERSHIP: 10 ECONOMY: 7 LEGACY: 6
Coates and English were excellent ministers but one-term PMs. Like Holyoake and Key they were liberals, accomplished political leaders (Holyoake and Key won three elections each) but introduced no major new policies or directions. They seemed content to leave the country pretty much as they found it. Kirk heads this group because of his foreign-policy initiatives, especially the campaign to stop France from testing its nuclear weapons in the Pacific, and his decision to stop the racially selected Springboks from touring New Zealand. Neither Holland nor Nash were especially effective as Prime Minister – even his private secretary thought Nash ineffectual – but he was a good Minister of Finance earlier. In the 1940s, Holland positioned the newly formed National Party to accept the main elements of Labour’s welfare state. As Prime Minister, he helped usher in a period of growth, consensus and contentment which is often overlooked because of his attack on organised “militant” union labour.
16. GEOFFREY PALMER
LEADERSHIP: 5 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 4
17. JENNY SHIPLEY
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 6
18. BILL ROWLING
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 4
19. JACK MARSHALL
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 6
20. RD MULDOON
LEADERSHIP: 7 ECONOMY: 2 LEGACY: 2
21. JACINDA ARDERN
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 2 LEGACY: 8
22. CHRIS HIPKINS
LEADERSHIP: 4 ECONOMY: 2 LEGACY: 1
23. GEORGE FORBES
LEADERSHIP: 1 ECONOMY: 5 LEGACY: 0
Although they differ considerably in personal style, all but Muldoon and Ardern were weak and ineffectual. The first four and Hipkins never won an election. Muldoon won three elections, so does well on leadership but scores poorly on the other criteria. Forbes and Ardern won one election each – Ardern’s victory being in an MMP environment – but even his supporters thought Forbes feeble. Ardern was the charismatic mistress of politics as performance but her government promised much and achieved little. However, she produced a very inclusive cabinet.
24. WINSTON PETERS
Not entirely a joke! Far more significant than many of the above. On four occasions under MMP his party, NZ First, formed a coalition with the dominant party (except in 2017 when he went with Labour) and he has held a senior positions within the government (twice being deputy PM). He has also been Treasurer and Minister of Foreign Affairs. I am not sure how to score him but can’t ignore him. On leadership and legacy he out-scores many of the above.
AURELIAN PRIZE (for success in a short time): David Lange
CALVIN COOLIGDE AWARD (for lengthy inaction): Keith Holyoake
Jim McAloon, Professor of History at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington
1. PETER FRASER 1940-49
As Michael Joseph Savage’s deputy, Fraser oversaw big social changes and expanded educational opportunities. As Prime Minister from March 1940, Fraser ensured New Zealand was an equal and independent partner with other wartime allies. His huge commitment to the war effort was tinged with authoritarianism, but far less so than William Massey in the earlier war. He was a vocal supporter of small nations at the foundation of the United Nations and was bitterly disappointed over the Great Power veto. He later oversaw post war reconstruction and cemented in the reforms of the 1930s.
LEADERSHIP: 9 ECONOMY: 9 LEGACY: 9.5
2. HELEN CLARK 1999-2008
Clark has the distinction of being Labour’s longest-serving and most electorally successful leader. Her leadership saw proportional representation embedded and legitimised as a workable expression of the popular will. She campaigned for a philosophically coherent and modernised version of social democracy. Clark’s relationship with the Finance Minister, Michael Cullen, was fundamental. They sought to improve savings and redistribute income. Clark kept her distance from the US over Iraq, pushed moderate employment reform and set up the Supreme Court as New Zealand’s final court of appeal.
LEADERSHIP: 9 ECONOMY: 9 LEGACY: 8.5
3. KEITH HOLYOAKE 1957 and 1960-72
If Sid Holland made the National Party electable, Holyoake made it “the natural party of government.” Compared with Holland, Holyoake was more intelligent, more likeable and less prejudiced. He made governing from the centre an art form. He is often accused of presiding over stagnation and missed opportunity. But he pushed for diversified markets, commodities, and industries, and got a workable deal when Britian entered the EEC. Holyoake also expanded social welfare, education and infrastructure. During the Vietnam War, Holyoake committed only enough forces to keep the Americans quiet. He happily devolved power to ministers but loses points for encouraging Muldoon.
LEADERSHIP: 9 ECONOMY: 9 LEGACY: 8
4. MICHAEL JOSEPH SAVAGE 1935-40
Savage won a fragile victory in 1935 but seized the opportunity to bring in wide-ranging reforms which delivered a record popular vote three years later. He believed in appearances and exploited his avuncular image to the full. If not always good on the detail, Savage had clear principles and an ability to read the circumstances. As Prime Minister, Savage let competent ministers get on with the job, but he was sometimes stuck with time-servers, restive back benchers and a hostile John A Lee. He was aware of the need to resist fascism. The often-quoted line “where Britain goes, we go” is not the whole story: for Savage, war was unfortunately necessary in New Zealand’s own interests.
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 9
5. SIDNEY HOLLAND 1949-47
Holland did as much as anyone to revive conservative fortunes after 1935 and make the new National Party electable. Holland believed in three things: private enterprise, security and the British Empire. He was an astute organiser and realised that National had to accept the welfare state that it inherited from Labour. His party didn’t use the slogan “as much market as possible, as much state as necessary”, but it might as well have. Holland’s years are remembered as comfortable, prosperous and slightly boring, despite serious industrial conflict on the waterfront. But the party’s authoritarian conservatism on that front was balanced by maintaining the welfare state. He also promoted younger people to cabinet.
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 7.5 LEGACY: 9
6. GORDON COATES 1925-28
Coates was a promising figure to replace William Massey and won a convincing election victory in 1925, only to be defeated just three years later. His advantages were charm, relative youth, a distinguished war record and a good reputation as a minister. But he was unlucky. The fragile prosperity of the mid 1920s ended and his forays into social welfare and centralised agricultural marketing made enemies on the right. He was a pragmatic centrist, who made his real mark as a minister in later governments. After 1939, Coates read the strategic situation and encouraged Peter Fraser to develop closer relationships with the United States in the face of British decline.
LEADERSHIP: 7.5 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 8
7. WALTER NASH 1957-60
Walter Nash had been an outstanding Finance Minister under Michael Joseph Savage and Peter Fraser. But by the time he became Prime Minister, he was nearly 76 years old. He faced a serious economic crisis and his response was praised by economists but roundly criticised by allies and opponents, especially increased taxes on alcohol, tobacco and petrol. Part of Nash’s problem was that the positive measures were buried by the negative. It’s tempting to regard Nash’s prime ministership as the result of a feeling that it would be nice to give the old boy a go. The high rating on the economy reflects the work of the Minister of Finance, Arnold Nordmeyer, as much as Nash.
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 9 LEGACY: 8
8. JACINDA ARDERN 2017-23
Ardern became Labour leader seven weeks before the 2017 election. She aroused great enthusiasm, but did not win enough votes to avert the need for New Zealand First and Green support. She established mechanisms to address the climate crisis, but her first term was overshadowed by crises and tragedies, including Covid. A decisive response, including lockdowns, saw the virus apparently defeated and Labour won a majority in the 2020 election. But Covid persisted and the lockdown became unpopular, compounded by protests from the lunatic fringe, sometimes intersected with misogyny and racism. Her leadership emphasised empathy and inclusiveness. Criticism of her economic policy is coloured by the wisdom of hindsight and political self-interest.
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 7
9. RICHARD SEDDON 1893-1906
Seddon was the ultimate political tactician, whose self-portrayal as a plain man belied a shrewd and intelligent character. He oversaw a return to loan-funded development after 1895. He was lucky as the world economy entered a long boom and New Zealand rode that for 20 years. From the late 1890s, the pace of reform slowed. Seddon strongly supported British imperialism and sent troops to fight in South Africa. Seddon promised some concessions to Māori, but often failed to deliver. A notable flaw was the accumulation of major cabinet offices to himself. But his domination of parliament, caucus, and press set a template for 20th-century prime ministers.
LEADERSHIP: 7 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 7.5
10. WILLIAM MASSEY 1912-25
Massey was an outstanding political organiser and tactician. His Reform Party became a conservative alternative to the Liberals. Massey’s first years as Prime Minister were dominated by industrial conflict with radical labour, and the suppression of conscientious objectors during World War I. His wartime economic management was complicated, and critics made much capital out of rising prices and generous terms offered to wealthy people to take out war bonds. His postwar agenda was to settle returned soldiers on the land and to encourage home ownership, but a recession in 1921-22 brought real problems. Massey’s historical reputation suffers from retrospective sympathy for strikers and draft resisters, but he was a very capable politician who probably should have retired before he ran out of steam in his last years.
LEADERSHIP: 8.5 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 7.5
11. NORMAN KIRK 1972-74
There is a warm glow of nostalgia around Kirk. His strength as prime minister was in articulating a strong vision of New Zealand as an independent nation. But he was, to put it politely, not strong on economics. Even in the boom of early 1973, he failed to understand that economic policy involves choices. Kirk espoused politics of humanitarianism, tinged with social conservatism. He was not receptive to emerging feminist politics, nor to militant trade unions, and he could play the law-and-order card with the best of them. In foreign policy, he shone, developing relationships with emerging nations and combating apartheid and the nuclear arms race. He also, perhaps, glimpsed a bicultural future for New Zealand.
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 8
12. BILL ROWLING 1974-75
Rowling was unlucky. The Labour Party was badly knocked by Norman Kirk’s death and Rowling – a much less-commanding presence, although a very able minister – suffered by comparison with Kirk and National’s Robert Muldoon. Rowling dealt with the worst recession in 40 years with remarkable ability, ensuring that domestic demand did not dive to the point of mass unemployment, and persuading unions to agree to wage moderation. But National’s 1975 election campaign combined populist nostalgia and scapegoating and ended Rowling’s prime ministership.
LEADERSHIP: 8 ECONOMY: 8 LEGACY: 6
13. JOHN MARSHALL 1972
Marshall was unlucky, coming into office in an election year at the end of a long period in government. Marshall’s reputation rests on his work as Trade Minister and as Minister of Industries and Commerce under Keith Holyoake. Above all, Marshall oversaw sustained diversification and got a workable deal with the EEC. He became known as “Gentleman Jack” in the 1960s for his courteous and understated demeanour, but he was an authoritarian conservative in the 1950s with his advocacy, and use, of the death penalty as Minister of Justice. Marshall was defeated by the Norman Kirk landslide at the end of 1972, and therefore had little chance to establish a legacy as Prime Minister.
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 9 LEGACY: 6
14 JIM BOLGER 1990-97
Bolger promised a consensual, centrist approach to reform, speaking of, “the decent society”. But his first term continued radical economic reform, which almost cost the party the 1993 election. Bolger then chose to distance himself from those policies and he eased his Finance Minister Ruth Richardson out of power. Bolger’s second administration consolidated those reforms, but had little further innovation. The 1996 election was conducted under proportional representation, and Bolger adeptly formed a coalition with previous rival Winston Peters. The subsequent policies were unpalatable to many and Bolger was retired in 1997. Perhaps Bolger’s greatest achievement was overseeing the start of the Treaty settlement process.
LEADERSHIP: 7 ECONOMY: 5 LEGACY: 7
15. DAVID LANGE 1984-89
Lange’s leadership is difficult to discuss in isolation from the radical policy changes which his government brought in. There was wide acceptance in 1984 for reform in one direction or another, and – no doubt in part because of Lange’s superb communication skills – things held together until the 1987 election. But his Finance Minister, Roger Douglas, proposed extended reforms which Lange was uneasy about but unable to exert control. That was a major political failing. On foreign policy, Lange’s achievements are well known, especially in advocating against nuclear weapons. But he was very poor at managing either his caucus or his cabinet. Lange was a gifted but flawed politician, who was ill-served by some colleagues. In the end he walked away.
LEADERSHIP: 7 ECONOMY: 5 LEGACY: 7
16. JOHN KEY 2008-16
As with Sid Holland, Key indicated that all the popular bits of the Labour government would remain while the annoying bits would be abandoned. Some saw this as a lack of ideological purity, but Key understood that winning elections is the first prerequisite. His affable persona was a decided asset, and he genuinely had some centrist instincts. He continued to prioritise Treaty settlements. On the other hand, he allowed the right of the party to take wins on employment and the environment. Like Helen Clark, the relationship with the Finance Minister, Bill English, was crucial, and they managed a relatively painless exit from the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-08.
LEADERSHIP: 7 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 6
17. GEOFFREY PALMER 1989-90
Palmer knew he had been handed a poisoned chalice on becoming Prime Minister. The damage within the party was too great; it was fracturing on the right and the left. He was convinced of the need to prioritise environmental sustainability. But faced with a panicking caucus in August 1990, Palmer stepped aside and was succeeded by Mike Moore. It is an open question as to whether anyone could have managed better. Given the brevity of his tenure, assessment is very difficult, so his ranking for his legacy reflects the whole period in which he was in government.
Leadership 6
Economy 6
Legacy 7
18 BILL ENGLISH 2016-17
Born in Lumsden, Bill English claimed his moderate and highly-respected Southland predecessor Brian Talboys as his role model and inspiration, and clearly with English, the farmer politician tradition in New Zealand was still alive. Like Bill Rowling, Geoffrey Palmer and Jenny Shipley, though, English had little time to make a mark as prime minister. As Health Minister in the late 1990s, and then as Key’s Finance Minister, English’s approach was apparently thoughtful and not given to ideological self-indulgence. His “big idea” was social investment, a shorthand for integrating the work of various agencies as they relate to vulnerable citizens. It could be an attractive one, if he had been able to dispel the suggestion that it was an alibi for reduced spending. English was doubly unlucky in 2017, in that the National Party’s share of the vote largely held up, but that of its potential partners declined.
Leadership 6
Economy 6.5
Legacy 6
19 JENNY SHIPLEY 1997-99
Shipley was New Zealand’s first woman Prime Minister. She was a very able politician. She was a close ally of Ruth Richardson, but was more astute in playing a long game. Having displaced Jim Bolger on the promise of a more philosophically consistent government, she overestimated her ability to dictate terms to a coalition partner, especially one led by Winston Peters. The consequence was a split in Peters’ New Zealand First party. A number of those who left supported Shipley in a fragile and occasionally undignified government. Shipley was unlucky in her timing; had she led National into government after a period in Opposition, she might well have achieved a good deal more.
LEADERSHIP: 6 ECONOMY: 6 LEGACY: 6
20. CHRIS HIPKINS 2023
Hipkins became Prime Minister in a swiftly engineered caucus arrangement on Jacinda Ardern’s resignation. As with any election-year takeover, he had a difficult task. He rapidly announced a number of policy reversals and moderations which were intended to make the party appeal to the centre. But this was seen by some in the wider labour movement as futile and counter-productive, and arguably, pushed some supporters into electoral abstention. Hipkins’ “economy” ranking is influenced by his undermining of the Finance and Revenue Ministers’ efforts to propose tax reform. In the next election, the party was decimated.
LEADERSHIP: 5 ECONOMY: 5 LEGACY: 5
21. ROBERT MULDOON 1975-84
Muldoon could be called unlucky in having to deal with unrelieved economic crises. But in 1975 he campaigned on the basis that it was all Labour’s fault. If he believed that, he was incompetent; if he didn’t, he was guilty of cynical irresponsibility. Either way, he desperately sought power. His dual roles as Prime Minister and minister of finance created a huge workload, and in the end, it broke him. Muldoon believed that he had a unique insight into the New Zealand economy and that he alone could manage it. He also sought to bend the economy to his will. The crisis after 1974 required consensus, which the abrasive Muldoon could not deliver. There were constant attacks on trade unionists, Pacific peoples, Māori who sought their rights, liberal progressives and others. A penchant for personal abuse was never offset by private acts of kindness.
LEADERSHIP: 4 ECONOMY: 4 LEGACY: 4
22. JOSEPH WARD 1906-12 and 1928-30
Ward’s first Prime Ministership inevitably suffers by comparison with Seddon. By the time he became Prime Minister Ward’s image was as carefully manicured as his fingernails and waxed moustache. With the reforms of the 1890s embedded, Ward’s government emphasised consolidation and administration, with further infrastructural development and continued Imperial fervour. But the Liberal Party’s support was fracturing: small farmers were increasingly conservative, and organised labour was increasingly radical. Perhaps no one could have resolved that problem, but Ward failed to articulate much of a philosophy to move into the 20th century. Ward came back into power in 1928 but his physical and mental decline thwarted effective government and he resigned in 1930.
LEADERSHIP: 5 ECONOMY: 5 LEGACY: 4
23. GEORGE FORBES 1931-35
The historian, Keith Sinclair said it all: “a good, honest man whose political merits will doubtless, one day, be uncovered by some dogged researcher”. Forbes had been in parliament since 1908, but had very limited ministerial experience, and displayed no ability to move beyond the narrow orthodoxy of austerity. His remedies for the Great Depression were budget cuts, relief work at minimal wages and political repression. To the extent that his government addressed the depression imaginatively, the credit must go to Gordon Coates as one of Forbes’ ministers. This included a devaluation to improve farmer incomes and the creation of the Reserve Bank. But in all this, Forbes was a passive bystander.
LEADERSHIP: 4 ECONOMY: 4 LEGACY: 4
Too brief to rank:
MILKE MOORE 1990
Mike Moore was Prime Minister for only 8 weeks, but he wanted the job and so is included. It’s impossible to know if Labour’s result in the 1990 election would have been better or worse, or much the same, if Geoffrey Palmer had remained as leader. Following the election, Moore’s performance as Labour leader was compromised, rightly or wrongly, by the perception of his association with Rogernomics.
AURELIAN PRIZE: Not given
CALVIN COOLIDGE AWARD George Forbes