logo
Good and funny, if not definitive

Good and funny, if not definitive

REVIEWED BY MIKE HOULAHAN
As anyone who has taken even a passing glance at the pages of the Otago Daily Times this week cannot have failed to notice, former prime minister Dame Jacinda Ardern has a book out.
Even more glaringly obvious is that New Zealand's 40th prime minister, a woman once hailed as the great unifier, still polarises people like few leaders this country have done.
The letters page has mixed hagiography and vitriol; social media has been all afrenzy.
What has somehow been lost in the heat and fire is that all this furore is about a book - and amidst a blizzard of commentary there is very little as to whether it is actually a decent read or not.
Well, for a start, of the three books on, or by, Jacinda Ardern that I've reviewed - and the fact that that makes her by far the most such scrutinised New Zealand prime minister speaks volumes - this is by far and away the best.
That should come as no surprise.
One was a foreign-authored cut-and-paste job with dubious ''co-operation'' from its subject, while the other, while well-written, was as much about the author as its subject.
I don't know if she had a helpful ghost writer but speaking as someone who has met Ardern several times, it certainly reads like her authentic voice.
This is the woman who always got a touch grumpy when - as I have with every PM I have had professional dealings with - I insisted on calling her ''prime minister'' rather than ''Jacinda''... but who equally, and unfailingly, always asked about the health of our children.
She actually does go out of her way to be likeable, engaging and - yes - kind, and it has always felt genuine and never forced.
She has always been a pleasant, interested and interesting conversationalist, and A Different Kind Of Power often feels like its author is telling you a story over a cup of tea or a single malt.
This is most apparent in the opening third of the book, in which Ardern describes her childhood and upbringing - by turns rose-coloured or tinged with sadness as events unfolded.
Perhaps because it is the least controversial part of Ardern's story, the bit she feels most relaxed and least self-analytical about, it is also the most entertaining.
The second part of the book describes Ardern's unlikely entry to Parliament, followed by her even less likely ascent to the leadership of the Labour party.
She skirts through these years carefully, trying hard not to offend anyone - again, typical behaviour, as A Different Kind Of Power often demonstrates.
That said, former leader David Cunliffe does not come out of things at all well.
Someone who does emerge in shining red colours, however, is South Dunedin's favourite son, Grant Robertson, who - after the main hero, Ardern's partner Clarke Gayford - is in contention with Ardern's father Ross for being the best supporting actor of this story.
The third part of the book, the Ardern prime ministership, is a mixed bag.
The best bits are terrific: her insider's account of March 15 is electrifying, her rundown of the early days of Covid-19 are compelling.
Those two events, unsurprisingly, dominate this part of the book.
Many of the major political events of her time are either skirted over or nor addressed at all.
This is no doubt due to the expected international audience for A Different Kind Of Power - readers in Manchester or Massachusetts are unlikely to care much about the Provincial Growth Fund, child poverty reduction targets or Kiwi Build.
But it also means that the definitive account of Jacinda Ardern's time as prime minister still waits to be written.
Overall, despite its shortcomings, this is a good and often very funny read about a fascinating figure and contains many interesting insights.
The sad thing about that sentence is that even that faint praise is going to see my email inbox clog up with vitriolic emails - and I know this because that exact thing has happened, despite my commentary being as neutral and even as possible, almost every time I have written about Ardern.
There is definitely a book still to be written which explores that subject.
Mike Houlahan is the ODT political editor
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

UK to lower voting age to 16 in landmark electoral reform
UK to lower voting age to 16 in landmark electoral reform

RNZ News

time3 minutes ago

  • RNZ News

UK to lower voting age to 16 in landmark electoral reform

By Sam Tabahriti , Reuters The British government says it plans to give 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in all UK elections. Photo: JONATHAN NICHOLSON / NurPhoto via AFP The British government plans to give 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in all UK elections in a major overhaul of the country's democratic system. The government said the proposed changes were part of an effort to boost public trust in democracy and would align voting rights across Britain, where younger voters already participate in devolved elections in Scotland and Wales. "They're old enough to go out to work, they're old enough to pay taxes ... and I think if you pay in, you should have the opportunity to say what you want your money spent on, which way the government should go," Prime Minister Keir Starmer told ITV News. The change will require parliamentary approval, but that is unlikely to present an obstacle because the policy was part of Starmer's election campaign last year which gave him a large majority. Despite that win, Starmer's popularity has fallen sharply in government after a series of missteps set against a difficult economic backdrop. His party sits second in most opinion polls behind Nigel Farage's right-wing Reform UK Party. A poll of 500 16- and 17 year-olds conducted by Merlin Strategy for ITV News showed 33 percent said they would vote Labour, 20 percent would vote Reform, 18 percent would vote Green, 12 percent Liberal Democrats and 10 percent Conservative. There are about 1.6 million 16- and 17 year-olds in the UK, according to official data. Just over 48 million people were eligible to vote at the last election, in which turnout fell to its lowest since 2001. The next election is due in 2029. Research from other countries has shown lowering the voting age had no impact on election outcomes, but that 16-year-olds were more likely to vote than those first eligible at 18. "Voting at 16 will also help more young people to cast that all-important, habit-forming vote at a point when they can be supported with civic education ," said Darren Hughes, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society. The reforms would also expand acceptable voter ID to include UK-issued bank cards and digital formats of existing IDs, such as driving licences and Veteran Cards. A more automated system will also be introduced to simplify the process of registering to vote. To tackle foreign interference, the government plans to tighten rules on political donations, including checks on contributions over 500 pounds (NZD$1131) from unincorporated associations and closing loopholes used by shell companies. "By reinforcing safeguards against foreign interference, we will strengthen our democratic institutions and protect them for future generations," democracy minister Rushanara Ali said in a statement. - Reuters

Pay talk protection: National backs Labour's transparency bill
Pay talk protection: National backs Labour's transparency bill

Otago Daily Times

time13 hours ago

  • Otago Daily Times

Pay talk protection: National backs Labour's transparency bill

Labour MP Dr Deborah Russell. By Giles Dexter of RNZ Members' bills from opposition MPs are more often than not doomed to fail, but there have been exceptions to the rule this term. Tracey McLellan's Evidence (Giving Evidence of Family Violence) Amendment Bill received unanimous support at its second reading, with all six parties in Parliament voting in favour. Deborah Russell's Companies (Address Information) Amendment Bill is being supported by National and ACT, but not by New Zealand First. Others, like Camilla Belich's Crimes (Theft by Employer) Amendment Bill, have passed thanks to the support of one of the smaller coalition parties (in this case, New Zealand First). But only one opposition bill has had the support of National, and only National this term, and it is another from Belich. On Wednesday night, her Employment Relations (Employee Remuneration Disclosure) Amendment Bill passed its second reading, thanks to National voting alongside the three opposition parties. The bill would ensure that pay secrecy clauses, which prevent employees from discussing their salaries with colleagues, would no longer be enforceable, meaning employers could not take legal action if an employee talked about pay. There will be cases where pay differences were justifiable (such as different skill sets or qualifications), but the bill's intention is to shed light on situations where they were unjustifiable. Australia, the UK, the EU, and some US states have either banned pay secrecy clauses or made them unenforceable. Belich said people already talk about their pay with colleagues, but stopping businesses from taking action against them for it would keep New Zealand up with the times. "It takes away the right for them to take action and discipline their employees when they talk about their pay. We know this happens already at the moment. So there's definitely a common sense, pragmatic element to this bill," she said. "It's making sure that usual human behaviour and workplace discussions are not something that people are disciplined for." Six National MPs took calls on the bill at its second reading. Every one of them referenced the gender pay gap and were hopeful the bill would be a mechanism to reduce it. Banks Peninsula MP Vanessa Weenink, who gave National's first contribution to the bill, said the party supported the bill because it had a "proud history" of driving down the gender pay gap. "We know that pay transparency is a key factor for driving down the gender pay gap. International studies have shown that when that legislation has been brought in, that it's measurable in the amount of reduction in the pay gap. So we really want to see that continue to fall down." Belich said it was great to see continued support for the bill. "I was heartened by the comments made in the house, where the National Party members said they would support this right through. I hope that's what they do," she said. "I think given the current context, where we've had significant changes to our pay equity regime, where women have had the ability to take pay equity claims severely curtailed, these types of bills, which make small changes to make a more transparent workforce, are increasingly important." Weenink said the "optics" around pay equity had nothing to do with National's support for the bill, as the party had also supported the bill at its first reading, well before the pay equity changes were announced. "It's just our ongoing commitment to doing what we can to make the workplace fair and improve productivity. How I see it is that if you can see you're being paid less than someone else who's working right beside you, doing the same job, then that's going to massively reduce your motivation, isn't it?" She did not see it as National handing Labour a win, but rather an opportunity to put party politics aside and improve things for New Zealanders. The bill passed its first reading in November. Sometimes, a bill is given cautious support at its first reading, in order to send it to Select Committee to see if the kinks are ironed out. The Education and Workforce Committee received 225 submissions on the bill, the majority in support. Belich said a number of changes were made to the bill through the Select Committee process, including making it clear there would be no requirement to make a disclosure. "It's still something that can be a private matter. It's only if you wish to that you shouldn't be disciplined for the desire to actually discuss that. So that was probably the major change through Select Committee." She said there were some definitional tidy-ups, including making it clear what the definitions of remuneration and detriment were, as well as ensuring the bill would not be retrospective. Some privileged or commercially sensitive information, for example, owner benefits for a business owner who also receives an employee salary, would also be excluded. Despite the changes, ACT and New Zealand First continued to oppose the bill. ACT said it would allow people to breach agreements they had signed up to, for which there should be consequences. "Once you've signed something, you are supposed to oblige to the conditions that you have signed for. If you do not agree to something in the agreement that you have signed, then there is an opportunity for you to go back and renegotiate the terms and conditions that you don't agree to," Parmjeet Parmar told the House. "But you don't just breach the agreement and say that there should be no consequences for that." New Zealand First's Mark Patterson said it "runs smack into the brick wall" of the party's belief in the "sanctity" of contract law. "While this bill doesn't prevent pay secrecy and that's still able to be incorporated within a contract, it does limit an employer's ability to enforce it, and that goes against what a contract should be," he said. Belich said she found the arguments against the bill "interesting," as it was specifically designed so businesses would not need to spend money to change their contracts. "If we'd said you cannot have a pay secrecy clause in your contract, or pay secrecy clauses are now illegal to have even in an employment document, there'd be thousands of employment agreements throughout the country that would need to be changed, that would cost money, that would take legal advice. It would be a burden on business." The bill still needs to go through the Committee of the Whole House stage for any further tidy-ups, and then a third reading, though Weenink did not foresee any major changes. "It took a long time to bash some of these things out, and I think we've got it to a really good place." Acknowledging National is a "broad church" and there had been strong discussions about the bill amongst the caucus, she did not expect any changes to the party's position at the third reading.

Listen to The Country online: Labour leader Chris Hipkins ponders a grand coalition
Listen to The Country online: Labour leader Chris Hipkins ponders a grand coalition

NZ Herald

time15 hours ago

  • NZ Herald

Listen to The Country online: Labour leader Chris Hipkins ponders a grand coalition

Labour leader Chris Hipkins spoke to The Country's Jamie Mackay today. Photo / Mark Mitchell Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech. Access to Herald Premium articles require a Premium subscription. Subscribe now to listen. Listen to The Country online: Labour leader Chris Hipkins ponders a grand coalition Labour leader Chris Hipkins spoke to The Country's Jamie Mackay today. Photo / Mark Mitchell Today on The Country radio show, host Jamie Mackay catches up with Labour leader Chris Hipkins to get his thoughts on the possibility of a grand coalition. Be in with a chance to go fishing with Scott Barrett and Kaiwaka Clothing. On with the show: Bruce Weir and Amber Brador: We announce the winner of the 2025 Rabobank Good Deeds Competition.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store