Analysis: Chris Hipkins ran rings around Christopher Luxon in the final TVNZ Leaders’ Debate, but it may well be a moot point, writes 1News political reporter Felix Desmarais.
Well, that one will be remembered as the “bed leg” debate.
It came very early on and set the scene. If you didn’t see it live, you’ll want to go back and watch it.
In fact, here it is:
Hipkins told Luxon that, "none of my MPs beat someone up with a bed leg". (Source: 1News)
In a discussion on trust, National leader Christopher Luxon went in for a - one would think - fairly solid attack line on Labour’s numerous lost ministers since Chris Hipkins became Prime Minister.
Hipkins came back with a reasonable if uninspired retort - he sets high standards for ministers and when they don’t meet them, they lose their jobs.
Luxon protested. Then came the line, from Hipkins: "People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. None of my MPs beat people up with a bed leg.”
He was of course referring to accusations around National’s Tauranga MP Sam Uffindell’s conduct while a student at King’s College. Uffindell has previously confirmed he did take part in an attack on another student, calling it "one of the dumbest, stupidest things I have ever done". At the time he said he had no recollection of using a bed leg.
Luxon was speechless.
Whether the line was a slam dunk or a low blow is a matter of taste, and likely coloured by one’s political proclivities. But it did throw Luxon off balance in the debate and Hipkins never allowed him to regain it.
Luxon’s strongest retort of the night felt uncomfortable: “You need to listen to Taylor Swift when she tells you to calm down.”
A 53-year-old man referring to a pop star, however popular, just feels like a dad trying to be cool around his daughter’s mates. It’s what Gen Z might refer to as “cringe”.
Assertive or 'disrespectful'?
Luxon’s game plan seemed to be to approach the debate in a way that made him appear prime ministerial, perhaps in response to Hipkins’ more assertive, at times over the top, heckling in the Newshub debate a couple of weeks ago.
At times it almost worked, such as one moment where in response to Hipkins’ needling, Luxon said it was “disrespectful” and the aim of the debate was a “conversation” for the public.
That made him look as though he was rising above the melee but equally, it’s not a conversation at all. It’s a debate, and interjections are part of it. They are often part of strategy - get the balance right on interruptions and you undermine the opposition’s confidence and stop them from delivering their messages.
Hipkins won in that respect. It would have annoyed some, but most of those were never going to vote for him anyway. For many others, it would have come off more like Hipkins was holding Luxon to account for his claims on the campaign trail.
Neither leader has fared particularly well in polls on trust. (Source: 1News)
And in response, Luxon repeatedly struggled to make clear rebuttal cases, relying too heavily on his propensity for meandering, waffling corporate-speak.
Hipkins was, through much of the debate, cool, cutting and confident. He appeared to genuinely enjoy himself, seemingly aware he was hitting his stride.
But it is two days until the polls close, and people have been voting now since October 2 (September 27 overseas).
As Luxon rides a mood for change, a tide likely aimed at voting one lot out rather than one lot in, Hipkins late-stage comeback will likely be baffling to the left and may be far too little, far too late.
SHARE ME