As a turbulent political year draws to a close some observations can be made about the state of the various parties and some of their personnel.

Within the National Party, this year has seen the emergence of Chris Bishop as not just one of the government’s key Ministers, with a range of new initiatives across his various portfolios, but also the go-to person when things do not go to plan. In that regard, he looks set to reprise the role of Minister of Everything, pioneered by Sir Bill Birch during the Bolger government, and developed to the ultimate degree by Steven Joyce in the last National-led government.

Erica Stanford has been National’s best performing Minister during the year. She has always managed to appear competent and professional, and on top of her brief. At the same time, she has shown, with her handling of the Abuse in Care inquiry outcomes, that she has the appropriate levels of compassion when required to balance her cool competence. Judith Collins continues to be National’s quiet achiever across a varied range of portfolios, and never putting a foot wrong.

On the other hand, Shane Reti has been the biggest disappointment. He has failed to achieve any of the government’s commitments on improving the public health system, despite retaining the soothing and reassuring bedside manner expected of a doctor. He must surely be a leading candidate for demotion when the first Cabinet reshuffle occurs next year.

Chris Hipkins has been Labour’s most consistent and persistent performer throughout the year. His contributions have generally been sensible and thoughtful, although constrained by the policy time-warp his party seems to be entering. Against the odds, it is becoming more likely that he could lead Labour into the next election, although whether he can achieve victory remains another question altogether.

However, Hipkins has been handicapped throughout the year by the largely somnambulant performance of the rest of his colleagues, many of whom have been dormant since before the last election. Others would best serve Labour’s interests by staying asleep, altogether. (Wille Jackson’s consistently buffoonish rants, and Aysha Verrall’s supercilious smugness come to mind.)

During 2025, Labour will need to start to cull many of the time servers and deadwood wasting space on its backbenches to get in shape to be competitive at the 2026 election.

As ACT leader, David Seymour has enjoyed a good year. While other ACT Ministers – notably Karen Chhour – have impressed, Seymour’s persona, built around his unflinching commitment to the controversial Treaty Principles Bill has largely shaped the party’s image, although not led to any significant increase in potential voter support. His challenge will be to maintain the momentum he has generated, once the Treaty Principles Bill bites the dust next year, and his elevation to the position of Deputy Prime Minister around the same time should assist in that regard.

Winston Peters’ durability and political stamina has been remarkable, and his wiliness has been an asset for the government during its first year. Next May, he will step down from his third stint as Deputy Prime Minister, shortly after his 80^th birthday. He says this will leave him plenty of time to campaign for New Zealand First’s re-election in 2026.

However, Shane Jones’ impatience to succeed Peters as party leader is beginning to show and may get in the way of any wish Peters has to lead New Zealand First into the next election. Jones is also no spring chicken and has made no secret of his interest in New Zealand First’s top job, whenever it should become vacant.

As far as the Green Party is concerned, this has been the year of Chloe Swarbrick. Through the most tragic and unexpected circumstances she has led the party through its most difficult year. Her drive and determination have sustained her thus far but maintaining that level of intensity over the next two years will be challenging. At the same time, she may need to curb her mounting tendency to appear to be talking down to people and hectoring them on policies the Greens feel passionately about.

Te Pati Māori has succeeded at becoming Parliament’s self-styled disruptor by making itself unpopular with everyone but its core constituency, which appears to be growing. This potentially creates a longer-term problem for Labour if it sees Te Pati Māori as a possible future partner in government. Labour could well consider it is becoming too hot to handle as a government partner, in much the same way as Helen Clark dismissed an earlier incarnation of the party as “the last cab off the rank” in 2005. On the other hand, Labour may have no path to government, other than with Te Pati Māori, although that may put at risk some of Labour’s more conservative support.

Finally, Parliament's best performer – as opposed to politician of the year – has been Speaker Gerry Brownlee who has performed his role with the patience, wisdom and dignity that critics might not previously expected of him.

That ends the observations this year. It is now time to wish everyone a happy Christmas and a rewarding 2025 ahead.

As the government begins its second year in office there has been much comment about the leadership style and tone of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon.

By his own admission he is a not a career politician. There have been occasions when that lack of political experience has shown. Much has been made of his corporate background, and his penchant for still speaking like a business leader (for example, referring to voters as customers in a recent interview, before correcting himself), and his personal wealth.

Most of this criticism is unfair, because in other ways, Luxon has proved himself to be a quick political learner. He defied most expectations at the time he became National’s leader in 2021 by transforming what was a disorganised rabble then into a viable government in waiting by 2023.

After Labour’s chaotic last three years in office after 2020, Luxon’s election commitment to get New Zealand “back on track” resonated with enough voters to make him Prime Minster after the shortest Parliamentary apprenticeship ever.

Nevertheless, commentators questioned whether he could make the transition from corporate chief executive to Prime Minister, especially when he launched a series of chief executive-style quarterly action plans.

In the first few months, it did not seem to matter. The government was getting on doing things, principally dismantling much of Labour’s legacy. They seemed to be working to a plan and to know what they were doing.

But then came the Budget and the apparent broken promise over funding new cancer drugs. Luxon had committed to funding these in the election campaign. There was surprise that Luxon had not seemed to appreciate the anger of those who felt betrayed by the lack of funding in the Budget.

Luxon moved quickly to correct the omission and eventually delivered a funding package which went well beyond National’s original promise. But to those who were affected it looked more like a hurried backtrack.

However, that was nothing compared to the furore over ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill. While Luxon is correct that such compromises are an inevitable part of MMP coalition government, he is under fire from all sides of the debate for his approach. To some he has been too weak, appearing mealy-mouthed by supporting the Bill’s introduction, but pledging to vote against it later. To others, he has been deliberately insensitive to the damage the Bill is causing to racial harmony in New Zealand. Recent disparaging comments about his leadership from both his coalition partners have not helped either.

The debate on the Treaty Principles Bill goes to the heart of Luxon’s leadership style and tone.  Despite his critics, he is content with the stand he has taken, resolute in his commitment that the government will vote the Bill down when it returns from the select committee next year. He does not appear too worried about what may happen in the meantime, because of his confidence in the ultimate outcome.

In many senses, the tension around the Treaty Principles Bill could have been managed better, or possibly defused slightly, had Luxon at any point given a considered speech about his view of the future direction of Crown/Māori relations, including the role and place of the Treaty. But that is not his style leading some to conclude he is not all that interested in the issue.

From the outset Luxon has been more focused on policy outcomes than reciting lofty policy intents so beloved by his immediate predecessors. That has served him well so far, but as the year has progressed, and the economy has not responded as positively as expected with rising unemployment and more people on benefits, it could be argued that the government needs to start painting a clearer picture about the country’s medium-term prospects and how these will be achieved.

At no stage since he became Prime Minister has Luxon delivered a major speech setting out the sort of country he wants to see New Zealand become over the next twenty years or so, and the various policy choices, over a range of issues, that we need to be taking to get there. It is hardly surprising therefore, given this lack of overall context, that as the tough times continue, more and more New Zealanders are feeling the country is heading in the wrong direction. Now is the time for the Prime Minister to set out a clear sense of direction for voters feeling uncertain about their futures.

Luxon’s mentor, Sir John Key, like Helen Clark before him, always portrayed a clear sense of purpose about what they wanted for New Zealand, which, whether one agreed with them or not, sustained their governments in the tough times, as well as the good ones. That cannot be said at present, which is why the current government is increasingly in danger of being regarded as directionless.

A narrative is beginning to emerge that the government is flinty faced and uncaring. If that view takes firm hold over the next few months, it may prove very difficult to dispel before the next election, no matter how the economy performs.

Luxon and his senior Ministers are clearly convinced they are on the right path to getting the country “back on track” and will likely stick to their task. But, as 2025 unfolds, it will be important to keep doubting New Zealanders onside.

That will be a critical test for Luxon's still developing – but quickly improving – political communication skills.