OPINION
In 1941 the Australian Labor Party came into office due to a dirty deal by cross-bench MPs. Its Prime Minister, John Curtin, was completely unsuited to the job (basically a fall-down drunk) – thrown into an international crisis with little idea of what to do, saved from himself by officials, and winning a “oncer” landslide election victory in 1943. Curtin has also, laughably, been elevated to sainthood by left-wing journalists and historians; lipstick on a pig writ large.
Do you see the similarities with Labour and Ardern in recent years here? I have long compared recent political events in New Zealand with the rise of Sir Robert Menzies in Australia during the 1940s.
But it gets even better; after winning another term in 1946 (to the surprise of their opponents) the Labor Government couldn’t contain itself; ushering in ‘socialism’, rampant inflation, falling living standards and, particularly, a plan to nationalise the banks. This saw Labor’s popularity evaporate, Menzies rose back into contention and eventually gained a comfortable election win for the Liberal party in 1949.
Once again the parallels with recent New Zealand politics are remarkable: even down to a Labor Prime Minister (in effect) separated from his wife and carrying on with a mistress, and an elderly ‘elder statesman’ who’d been around since forever returning to prominence. I’ve stated previously that Robert Menzies in Australia seems the closest historical example for Christopher Luxon today.
Bob Menzies ushered in a long period of prosperity, stability, strong leadership and ‘certainty’ for Australia. He had created the Liberal party in 1944, led it to seven election victories, promoted good men to ministerial positions, and was blessed with the most marvellous – (in the sense of being unelectable) – political opponents who did everything they could think of to assist him becoming Australia’s longest serving Prime Minister. Christopher Luxon is in a similar position here in New Zealand today.
(As an aside, Menzies’ main opponent Labor leader “Doc” Evatt was a man who was mentally ill but undiagnosed until after he’d left politics. This began an odd ALP ‘tradition’ with lunatics Mark Latham and Kevin Rudd also ending up party leader!)
Anyway, one of the downsides of Robert Menzies dominating things for such a long time is that he overshadowed his successors. Every subsequent Liberal leader has faced unfair comparisons with Menzies – justified with McMahon, Snedden, Nelson, and probably Morrison – an eighty year shadow which won’t disappear from Australian politics.
This has seen a sort of media cottage industry spring up (lest you thought it was just New Zealand which has breathtakingly unimaginative journalists) whereby at approximately four-year intervals since Menzies’ retirement in 1966 some wet dullard will, his voice stentorian, discuss the neurasthenia which has engulfed the Australian Liberal party. He will then sadly shake his head and exultantly proclaim “this is no longer the Liberal party of Robert Menzies”. Such nonsense has been taking place since Harold Holt tragically went swimming in December 1967. The latest twit doing so is someone called Will Kingston, a Sky News contributor, and is nothing more than a hit piece on Liberal leader Peter Dutton. Considering everyone else – from Gorton, to Fraser, to Howard, to Abbott, to Turnbull, to Morrison (and everyone in between) – has had the exact same thing written about them, too, hopefully, Mr Dutton takes no notice of it: “The Liberals are terminal – yet have been in office for 51 years out of 74” is certainly a rather odd thing to say.
Sources: