Luxon survives. But why do National and Labour both struggle with effective leadership?

Christopher Luxon has survived a confidence vote in caucus – his second within five months – and remains prime minister.

In a very brief statement this afternoon, he

said the National Party caucus is united and he has its full support – despite earlier having spoken on social media about the distraction of “division and disunity”.

The party was now “going back to work and moving on,” he said.

The entire drama was ignited by reports of dissatisfied National MPs leaking to the media, fuelling speculation about Luxon’s leadership. Wanting the issue “to be resolved quickly”, he called the urgent meeting.

This felt like a decisive move, as if he was confident he had the numbers to defeat the dissidents and ward off all rivals. But it also coincided with the latest TVNZ/Verian poll showing Luxon down to 17% as preferred prime minister.

If his leadership had been truly secure, the matter would never have had to be put to a vote again.

The only saving grace, perhaps, is that opposition leader, Labour’s Chris Hipkins, is also unpopular, and the Labour Party lags behind National in recent polls.

Tests of modern leadership

This is hardly new territory for the National Party which burned through three leaders in 2020, before being wiped out in a Labour landslide at that year’s election.

Labour itself had been through several leaders before anointing Jacinda Ardern just weeks out from the 2017 election. She became the party’s sixth leader in nine years.

With the 2026 election fast approaching, a sitting prime minister facing a crisis within his own party, and the opposition leader not faring well either, New Zealanders may be asking where they can find good leadership.

We might even ask, has political leadership simply become too difficult in this fast-paced information age, where crises and culture wars seemingly never let up?

A quick survey of similar Westminster-style democracies might help. Are they doing any better, and are there clues to what makes an effective leader?

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is in his second term and still doing relatively well in preferred prime minister polls, ahead of his two main rivals Angus Taylor (Coalition) and Pauline Hanson (One Nation).

But a majority are dissatisfied with his performance, and think their country is heading in the wrong direction. Like Luxon, Albanese has been gaffe-prone, but still keeps his ahead above water in polls.

In the United Kingdom, the governing Labour Party is still test-driving new leader Andy Burnham. But former prime minister Keir Starmer was deeply unpopular, and stood down a month ago.

Criticised for his wooden, lawyerly style, and for failing to act decisively on economic growth and immigration, there was something about Starmer the public just didn’t respond to. Luxon shares this problem.

Labour has since seen a polling recovery, with Burnham ahead of his main rivals in preferred prime minister polls. It may just be a honeymoon – something Luxon enjoyed when he took over as party leader, but only briefly.

Meanwhile, all eyes are on the Clacton by-election where Reform UK leader Nigel Farage is facing off against Count Binface. If you thought Wellington was a circus, British politics at least has its humorous side.

Can you learn leadership?

The standout performer as a leader at the moment is Canada’s Mark Carney. He rescued the centre-left Liberal Party, formerly led by Justin Trudeau, and won the election in April 2025.

The Liberals have since increased their lead in polls over the Conservative Party and Carney is seeing around 50% in leadership polls. What is he getting right?

As a former governor of both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, he brings a wide international experience, intellectual rigour and clarity to the job.

Canadians refer to his “concentration and focus” and “bold, resolute and defiant” style. That defiance was on display in January at the World Economic Forum in Davos where Carney pitched a new world order balanced by the middle powers.

Others refer to his ability to build trust. He has, it’s said, “an ability to read the room” and “a steady hand in a time of crisis”.

Under pressure, though, it’s reported he can be disciplined but harsh. He has been known to lose his temper. He values humility, and is often self-deprecating, but can be “very demanding”.

For the time being, Carney’s leadership capital is high, and Luxon might learn from his example. Despite being a former central banker, Carney has cultivated a down-to-earth style that people have warmed to.

By contrast, Luxon’s personal brand as a successful CEO and business leader, and his reliance on management-speak, have hindered his ability to connect with ordinary voters.

It has also contributed to his weakened position as leader since taking office in late 2023. The gaffes and missteps that led to the latest crisis seem to be a feature, not a bug.

Both Luxon and Hipkins should know by now that political leadership isn’t easy, and the voting public can be unforgiving. But they can also look to others who are doing a noticeably better job.

Luxon’s survival today reduces political uncertainty, to a degree. But the election, and potentially the coalition negotiations to follow, will test his will and skill. His leadership after November 7 is not at all a sure thing.

Grant Duncan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.