Ahead of last week’s caucus retreat, Labour set in place four whips to manage the risks of a big, unruly caucus.
Idle hands, big egos and unfulfilled ambition are a reality for parties with lots of MPs, and if not properly managed these challenges can lead to gaffes or even political turmoil.
Labour’s landslide victory in October saw it bring in 23 new MPs, bringing the party’s caucus to 65.
Meanwhile, ACT also secured an impressive election result, growing the party’s caucus from one MP to 10.
While every party is looking to grow its share of the vote, and have greater influence over policies and legislation that shapes the direction of their party and the country, having a big caucus presents its own set of challenges.
The types of people attracted to a career in politics often have big egos and big ambitions; they’re keen to make their mark and show their worth. But this desire to get stuck in and stand out is often at odds with what parties are seeking from backbench or first-term MPs.
Recent history is littered with examples of backbench MPs who’ve stuffed up, all the way from small gaffes through to political turmoil.
Whether it’s Hamish Walker’s failed attempt to contribute to his party’s opposition to the government’s handling of Covid-19; or Aaron Gilmore’s ego mixed with too much time, too much alcohol, and not enough oversight; through to Jami-Lee Ross’s unfulfilled ambition resulting in full-scale mayhem.
Political parties have no reason not to be aware of the risks that come with large caucuses, and the need for thorough vetting, instilling discipline, providing ongoing pastoral care, and making sure MPs feel valued and useful.
However, political experts and former MPs who spoke to Newsroom said they still expect some of these perennial issues to arise this term. Having more MPs increases the chance of an outlier emerging, and potentially doing damage to the party.
“New MPs need to learn quickly that they are part of a team, and that if they do not quickly hang together, they will assuredly hang individually.” – Former United Future leader Peter Dunne
Former MP and United Future leader Peter Dunne said the main challenges for both Labour and ACT will be curbing ambitions and keeping people focused and busy.
“All new MPs are impatient to make their mark, and think that once elected they can get on with doing the things they see as important to them, regardless of how they fit with their party.”
In many cases that wasn’t a bad thing, unless they were out of step with the rest of their colleagues, Dunne said.
MPs were disparate groups and the challenge for party leadership, in both cases, would be instilling early a sense of discipline and focus.
“New MPs need to learn quickly that they are part of a team, and that if they do not quickly hang together, they will assuredly hang individually.”
Dunne, like others who spoke to Newsroom, referred to the old story of the devil making work for idle hands.
This is a particular risk in cases where MPs feel disgruntled or where there is nervousness around a party’s polling or popularity. Under-utilised MPs blame senior colleagues and leadership, and become convinced they could do a better job.
In 2002, Dunne managed to ‘turn the worm’ in the lead-up to the election, largely through impressive performances in the televised debates.
This last-minute surge in popularity resulted in United Future bringing in a larger-than-expected caucus, where he dealt with ambitious MPs, whose backgrounds and characters he was unfamiliar with.
Dunne said parties had become better at scrutinising their potential candidates – although National’s experiences last year showed what could happen when vetting was not thorough – but recent examples showed there was still a way to go when it came to pastoral care.
Party boards had an important initial role in ensuring the quality of candidates selected, but party leadership needed to do much better in monitoring the conduct of MPs, he said.
“Politics is not just just an accidental occupation.”
It was a profession just like law, accounting or medicine, but that wasn’t always appreciated.
“No one would walk into an operating theatre and start doing brain surgery without years of training, yet everyone thinks being an MP is a bit of a doddle.”
Dunne said the reality of the job was quite different to what many MPs expected, and they needed to learn the role from the ground upwards, rather than just assume they could do it easily. That took time, discipline, and a fair amount of humbling.
Political commentator and former National Party staffer Ben Thomas said a lot of the issues came down to the types of people who were attracted to a career as a politician.
And when there were lots of those people, or the party apparatus was unable to manage them all, there was a chance of things going awry.
“The big challenge is, the more people you get, the more people you have to manage. And the more politician-sized egos you need to accommodate,” he said.
“Governments and leadership want consistency, whereas the sort of people who are often inclined to run for Parliament often want to have their say.”
Very few people entered parliament with the goal of being a long-serving backbencher, who year-after-year dutifully delivered patsy questions, and speeches on bills that they hadn’t really read.
Most people could keep it together for three years, or six years, especially with the hope of advancement, Thomas said.
“But the higher the ratio of MPs to ministerial or executive slots, the more distant promotion seems, the more chances that you’ll feel disgruntled if you’re passed over for one of your peers, and also higher the chance that you will get bored.”
“Prime ministers aren’t looking for the next prime minister, they’re looking for good lieutenants.”
– Ben Thomas
When people were bored, on the parliamentary precinct for long hours, and far from home, the pressures could manifest in ways that could harm MPs and the party.
Drinking among first-term backbench MPs was a real problem in some cases, he said, pointing to the example of former National MP Aaron Gilmore.
It was not unheard of for those seen as a discipline risk to be informally buddied with another MP. In some cases that meant MPs were not allowed to go out drinking while unsupervised in some capacity, he said.
This all highlighted the need for ongoing pastoral care, support and professional development – something parties were working on improving, but still struggling with.
But there was hope for those backbench and new MPs who kept their heads down, worked hard in select committees and gained the respect of their peers and leadership.
And having more MPs in a caucus also increased the chance of the party identifying “a bolter” – someone who shines once inside parliament.
Jan Tinetti is a prime example of someone who does not have a large ego, and hasn’t been in the spotlight, but did the hard yards in her first term, and has been rewarded with a spot in cabinet and notable portfolios.
“Prime ministers aren’t looking for the next prime minister, they’re looking for good lieutenants,” Thomas said.
“When MPs misbehave, or gaffe, it’s not because they’re driven by malice, there’s just a disconnect and they don’t quite know the message or how to behave.”
– Neale Jones
Former Labour chief of staff Neale Jones said the flipside of having a wave of popularity, like Labour’s, was when the tide went out – and it would – people might feel like they needed to make a splash if they were going to keep their seats.
“And they might start behaving in silly ways to get attention.”
It wasn’t just about whether someone disgraced themselves, even making unplanned noise could distract from the party’s core messages, he said.
“When MPs misbehave, or gaffe, it’s not because they’re driven by malice, there’s just a disconnect and they don’t quite know the message or how to behave.”
Speaking about ACT’s situation, Jones said it was easy to maintain message discipline and caucus discipline when a party was a team of one.
And while it would be helpful for David Seymour to have more people to share the workload, that came with its own challenges.
“[Seymour’s] going to have to give caucus members responsibility – meaning portfolios and spokesperson roles – so as with any caucus, in any party, there will be gaffes, there’ll be stuff-ups, there’ll be misfires.
“And he needs to show that he can manage a team, and keep them together, and on-message.
“And if he can do that, he’s got a good chance of maintaining and building on his vote. If he can’t, he may well see his vote plummet, and his party in disgrace.”
While it would be interesting to see how ACT managed its larger, eclectic mix of MPs – under the watchful eye of former staffer, now co-leader and whip Brooke van Velden – Jones said Labour was very aware of the challenges that came with having a large caucus and had gone to lengths to mitigate the risks.
For the first time, Labour has appointed four whips to provide oversight, mentoring, professional development, and management of the MPs.
Kieran McAnulty, who arrived in the class of 2017, was expected to be made a cabinet minister this term, but instead held the place of chief whip, and was known for his good manner and easy rapport. He also had the trust of the prime minister.
Willow-Jean Prime was a rising star in the Māori caucus, new MP Barbara Edmonds had experience as a ministerial staffer and was familiar with the Beehive, and Duncan Webb’s legal background would help support MPs navigate the House and the legislative process.
Someone who knows a lot about the important – often unseen – this internal job is former senior whip Ruth Dyson.
Dyson said the whips team presented a strong face.
“The work programme that the leadership team and the whips’ team has produced is built on a strong culture of unity, discipline, respect and support.”
– Ruth Dyson
She knew for a fact that despite being a front-runner for a cabinet position, McAnulty actually asked the prime minister to be nominated as chief whip. “To forgo a possible cabinet place in favour of the whips role shows a real commitment to, and passion for, the cohesion of the team,” she said.
The role division of the other three whips utilised their personal skills, and Dyson said their pastoral care and professional development programme was the most advanced she had seen.
“The work programme that the leadership team and the whips’ team has produced is built on a strong culture of unity, discipline, respect and support,” she said.
“This is a hard bunch of values to maintain in a strong ego and competitive environment.”
Dyson reiterated the improvement of Labour’s selection and vetting process – particularly since 2014, when some potential candidates caused unwanted attention in the lead-up to the election.
Nowadays, most of those who made it to the list were well-known to the party, and had been members or active within Labour for a long time; they were a known quantity.
The rigorous selection, vetting and weighting of Labour candidates led by party president Claire Szabos was a testament to her commitment to the quality of the caucus, Dyson said.
She also recognised the many challenges that came with idle hands and political egos, but Dyson said she was confident the team and their programme ticked all the boxes of mitigation.
“There is nothing more irritating than putting your hand up for extra work and seeing someone cruise along doing the bare minimum.”
– Ruth Dyson
Meanwhile, she also pointed to the opportunities that came with having a larger caucus.
More MPs meant the ability to share the workload more easily, and offered diversity of opinions and expertise.
But the trick to utilising those opportunities was to share the workload fairly, she said. “There is nothing more irritating than putting your hand up for extra work and seeing someone cruise along doing the bare minimum.”
Leadership also needed to make time to ensuring various opinions had an opportunity to be shared and were not dismissed.
Jones said having a large caucus gave Labour more to draw from to stope the second-term government from going stale. “And there are quite a few talented people in the class of 2020.”
There were also significant upsides to having more electorate MPs with roots in the community. This was something National has done well in the past, but something that Jones said Labour struggled with – especially while in opposition.
“It sounds small, but you do get a richer feedback and connection to those communities.”
