The good, the bad, and the ugly

By Ken Russell in All Sorts

Ken looks at recent political events.

The good, the bad, and the ugly. The latest scandal to rock the political establishment contains all three elements, and at the risk of being overtaken by fastmoving developments, I offer the following by way of comment on events leading to the resignation of Darren Hughes from Parliament.

Let's begin with the bad. Darren Hughes is just the latest of a continuing line of our political leaders who have come to grief in a tawdry web of scandal, with swirling unproven allegations, police investigations, sexual innuendo, and more than a whiff of over- consumption of alcohol. It should be no surprise, perhaps, that the private lives of politicians feature the same brew of antisocial ingredients that go on bedeviling the youth of the nation, but we of the electorate go on hoping that perhaps our leaders have sufficient personal maturity to ensure that what happened involving Mr Hughes in Wellington a few weeks ago just does not happen. But no surprise, sadly, that yet another political career, one said by his colleagues to have been of great promise, has come crashing down. Yes, there is agreement that our legislators, those who make laws for the rest of us, should live by the highest moral and ethical standards. And yes, there is also agreement that Parliament is a glasshouse - some would say a beargarden - into which only the strongest and most hardened should venture, well aware of the perils of being seen to fall from grace. In that sense Darren Hughes might be seen as one who in his parliamentary career has lived by the sword, and now he has died by the sword. But that is the cynical view. On the human side it is sheer tragedy that a young man brimming with the gifts we would all desire for our political leaders - personally attractive, intelligent, politically committed, and with exceptional skills of communication, especially among young adults, should have fallen in such ignominy. With the nation locked into the deepest sorrow for the community and people of Christchurch it is perhaps too easy to overlook the fact that life goes on for the rest of the country. The loss in this manner of one of the brightest and the best, albeit from the Opposition and not the Government, comes at a time when the country is in dire straits and needs all the visionary leadership the likes of Darren Hughes was capable of giving.

Next, the ugly. Quite by accident last Sunday night I fell on TVNZ's Channel 7's repeat of Paul Holmes' Q+A interview with Labour leader Phil Goff and his handling of the Darren Hughes affair. I was deeply troubled by the interview. So just to make sure I went back to the transcript which is readily available on the channel's website, and listened again. To call it an interview is a travesty of the word. It was Holmes at his worst, arrogant, driving, and bullying, determined to ram home a preconceived position that Mr Goff's decision to keep the Hughes business under wraps for two weeks was driven not by loyalty to his younger colleague, nor by his concern that justice should be done quietly through a police investigation out of the glare of the spotlight. It was politics, he said, a desperate attempt to save a colleague and prevent a political disaster for Labour in election year. Mr Goff many times denied Holmes' allegations, and with emotion. But Holmes was unrelenting. It was an appalling abuse of the interviewer's privilege, and quite rightly Mr Goff at one stage broke off to ask Holmes whether he was listening at all, and was in effect interviewing himself? It was ugly alright. It was a classic example of the oppressive power of the media, the same media with which any politician must deal if/when he/she dares to step outside the expected norms to uphold personal values of justice and integrity.

Last, the Good. Yes, there is some good to be found in this tawdry business. Senior Labour MP's met with Phil Goff in Dunedin this week, and despite intense media speculation there was a rising rift in the ranks to unseat him, he was able to achieve a united front behind him. I have been one who has doubted his suitability to lead Labour. He has presented an overly jaunty demeanour; he has been too wordy; and he has given an impression of being more well-meaning than resolute. But in the firestorm of recent days he has done more than simply survive. He has matured and held his own in the face of the barrage that was thrown against him. He may not have opted wisely as a politician or a party leader in sitting with the Darren Hughes information as long as he did, but at worst he did the wrong thing for the right reason. The fact is his actions were dictated by loyalty, a sense that justice needed to be given a chance, and that the career of a valued colleague should not lightly be jeopardized.
It is not a bad thing that a political leader is seen to risk his own reputation for the sake of values as simple and straightforward as loyalty, justice and friendship. He deserves credit for that, and not the arrogant bullying to which he has been subjected by a media thirsty for blood on the floor.

The good, the bad and the ugly. Not for the first time, and likely not the last, we are reminded that those elected to public office enter a jungle where it is incredibly difficult to practice pure politics unsullied by the sordid, destructive dimensions of deal making and recrimination. It is a indeed a bruising environment up there in Wellington, guaranteed to quickly extinguish idealism. It must be terribly difficult to maintain one's integrity and one's best human values. These people warrant if not our agreement than certainly our understanding of a demanding role. And personally, the hope that in the fullness of time Darren Hughes will be back. Such men are too good to lose.

-- Ken Russell

First printed as a Connections article in the Parish Weekly Bulletin, April 3, 2011.