NZ WI: Norman Kirk Lives

If "Big" Norm Kirk lives, Robert "Piggy" Muldoon & co would find it harder to win the next election. But I don't see Labour having more than two consecutive terms, before National get back in. With the 1973 oil shock and Britain's joining the EU, Labour will still be caught out somewhat as they were still in classic left wing mode and the loss of Britain as a near certain market was not fully appreciated at first. As a result, Kirk's mana will be needed to see off the threat of Muldoon in '75. The only way I can see to handle this economic crisis is to open our relatively closed markets (at the time), seek to develop closer trade links with Australia and Asia, especially China, Japan and India and introduce currency reforms.

Some kind of Think Big programme may be initiated by Labour, as it fits with their desire to promote businesses and industrial development in the regions.

Socially, I'd expect the welfare state programmes to be advanced as per OTL.

If successful in 1975, I'd also expect them to intervene in the All Black tour to South Africa, despite the outrage from the NZ rugby public.
 
Last edited:
One of the issues with this is that it seems accepted Kirk was quite ill for a while before his death. So any substantive change, where he say lasts longer than a few months, requires an earlier change of some sort.

It would be interesting to see how the election turned out. The scale of National's victory was quite substantial, which seems to indicate at least to me that Muldoon & co really caught the mood of the country (debt, super, springbok tours etc). That being said, Kirk clearly had developed a lot of mana by this point and assuming he wasn't deathly ill, he would likely come across quite favourably compared to Rowling. That certainly would help.

Maybe a better turn out for Social Credit and a worse turnout for Values too? Looks like there were a half a dozen National victories over Labour that were pretty marginal, but the scale of the victory was such that a lot of seats were picked up and became nominally quite safe National.

We had a thread here recently where people commented on the 75 campaign, although I cannot remember the conclusions

Anyway, here are some links
http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/gallery---norman-kirk-the-first-250-days-1973
 
I think the mid-70's recession gets Kirk in 1975 and this ATL goes like OTL.

Sure, but he could rescue the performance so instead of a landslide defeat, it just becomes a defeat. That would be interesting by itself. Muldoon came into power looking invincible, but if he doesn't have say 23 seat margin but something half of that, then he may be less able to take radical steps.

That being said, I would assume that Labour had taken a lot of seats in areas they would not normally have much strength. I see they even won Central Otago!
 
Sure, but he could rescue the performance so instead of a landslide defeat, it just becomes a defeat. That would be interesting by itself. Muldoon came into power looking invincible, but if he doesn't have say 23 seat margin but something half of that, then he may be less able to take radical steps.

That being said, I would assume that Labour had taken a lot of seats in areas they would not normally have much strength. I see they even won Central Otago!

Of course Labour would do better with Kirk. I dunno about Muldoon taking a backward step, it wasn't in his personality.
 
If you want to make it interesting.
  • Have Kirk call an early election in 1974 where Labour is returned.
  • Labour wins again in 1977 with a better economy (with or without Kirk). Muldoon steps down from the National leadership.
  • In 1980 National wins with a pro-market leader and starts free market reforms. Who is NZ's Reagan/Thatcher?

    OR

  • In 1980 Labour scrapes back. How do they deal with the 1981 Springbok tour?. National wins in 1983.
 
It would be interesting to see how National played out at this point, if they did not win the 75/8 elections. I suspect that the people that became neo liberals would both have less strength as Muldoon discredited the orthodox but on the other hand, the new thinking was on the rise everywhere and perhaps both National and Labour might be more open to it in other ways
 
I think Kirk would win nartowly in 1975, say getting a 5 to 10 seat majority.From there Labour preserves their achievements such as the superannuation and Kirk remains popular. Some program similar toThink Big could be passed. 1978 could be a nail-biter but let's say for the purpose of the scenario Labour squeaks thtiugh with a 2-seat majority. Muldoon is replaced vy a different leader in 1979, I think Geirge Gair or Jim Bilger are likely choices. Kirk probably retires around this period or dies if the illness is just delayed. Rowling takes over and stops the Tour. While the economy is better than IOTL and the debt is lower, Labour is not very popular. Anger at no Tour, a bad economy, voter fatigue and disdain for Rowling lead to a sizable National majority which probably implements minor liberalisation measures. Then NZ has much more moderate reforms, which you can then portray how the country goes depending on your views.
 
As JV has touched on earlier, the major problem is that Kirk really wasn't a well man. Over the years, I have come across a number of anecdotal accounts as to the possible real extent of Kirk's ill health, often from seemingly unlikely sources. The most recent one I have come across: the autobiography of the now late Captain Ian Bradley RNZN, "Don't Rock The Boat". I don't have my copy at hand, but I recall a passage where Bradley encounters a RNZAF Hercules that Kirk has been using, and the array of medical equipment being carried by the Herc sees Bradley believe that the full extent of Kirk's health issues is being concealed from the general public.

A former Muldoon Government cabinet minister I worked with for a number of years (a man who if anything was sympathetic to Kirk's ambitions) is firmly of the opinion that Kirk died believing that his government had failed/would fail.

Kirk was a man in a hurry, with ill health and two election defeats behind him already (hard to imagine any party allowing a leader that many bites of the cherry today). To ride out the impact of the oil shocks and British EEC entry on the NZ economy he would need to moderate some of his immediate ambitions, and I am hard pressed to seeing him doing that.

I quite agree that a well Kirk may well have seen the '75 election being a closer run affair. However, a more likely possibility would have been a contest between a reduced, tired Kirk and Muldoon at the peak of his powers. In this scenario the "what if" mystique aspect of the Kirk Government to an extent remains, but is diminished by his personal involvement in the 1975 defeat.

Regardless, the lesson duly noted by Labour's young up and comers: the vital need to secure a second term.
 
Probably the classic - everyone knows everyone in NZ but unless you actually talk to someone, the fine detail will evaporate in the mists of history.

So, ideally we need a health handwave 2 or so years before his OTL death, as otherwise he'll just be lurching about looking very unwell.

Assuming he does stay in power for another term, is it inevitable that Think Big or the like is created?

I'm just a bit young for all of that so my memory of TB is really well after the fact. Wandering around Clyde Dam as a child en route into Central, or reading about the financial cost in 3rd form Economics.

Was there any sort of political-economic consensus for TB? I suspect not.
 
I was all of 10 or 11 when the TB projects were being announced (but the sort of kid who was very much interested in that kind of thing - man, I needed to get a life!), and watching Kirk's funeral on TV is one of my earliest memories.

I don't think that there was any political consensus at all regarding TB at the time, but I am sure that I am far from alone in viewing the Muldoon years as far more polarised than the political climate we see in NZ today.

That said, it is all about timing, and I see TB in some shape or form as something that Kirk as a man of a nationalist bent would have found appealing and initiated himself had he enjoyed better health and managed to secure a second term. I see both Kirk and Muldoon as very much nationalists, though with perhaps there own flavours of nationalism and NZ identity.

I often think it useful to ask the question: how would NZ's current generation of political leadership react today to a quadrupling of the oil price inside a six month period, as was the actual case between October '73 and April '74? Especially if you could throw a modern equivalent of UK EEC entry into the equation as well...


I find TB appealing from the standpoint of providing a degree of independence, national self-reliance, and building NZ's industrial base. As to the actual economics of TB, well...I can only offer that if a more long term view had been taken rather than a fire-sale approach, maybe TB would be viewed differently today. The simple fact that they were driven by Muldoon even today probably denies them a fair trial, I suspect...
 
Scenario: Kirk lives, wins in 1975 narrowly with 23-seat majority becoming a 9-seat majority. He entrenched superannuation scheme and does Think Big, but that is failing in 1978 and Muldoon beats him. Muldoon, having seen Think Big fail and having been most economically liberal in his first term makes some reforms. Moyle beats Rowling for the Leadership. In 1980 Moyle beats Muldoon and Roger Douglas is Finance Minister. Moyle can be NZ's Hawke and Douglas the Keating. If Muldoon wins in 1978 what happens to superannuation? What would be the effects? Thoughts?
 
Scenario: Kirk lives, wins in 1975 narrowly with 23-seat majority becoming a 9-seat majority. He entrenched superannuation scheme and does Think Big, but that is failing in 1978 and Muldoon beats him. Muldoon, having seen Think Big fail and having been most economically liberal in his first term makes some reforms. Moyle beats Rowling for the Leadership. In 1980 Moyle beats Muldoon and Roger Douglas is Finance Minister. Moyle can be NZ's Hawke and Douglas the Keating. If Muldoon wins in 1978 what happens to superannuation? What would be the effects? Thoughts?

It's possible that some of "Think Big" manifests itself as different projects in the mid 1970s - mainly transport projects in big cities, such as electrification of train lines to provide a mass transit "spine" in Auckland (augmented by feeder buses), and the underground rail link that was killed by Muldoon's government in OTL. An argument could even be made for light rail in Christchurch utilising all that hydro power that's becoming available.

If decisions to green-light urban public transport projects are made promptly by Kirk after the 1975 election, by the time Muldoon is elected in 1978 there's no way to back out.

As for the compulsory superannuation contributions, I think it would gain even more traction in the public once everyone has had an end-of-year statement or two, and sees their own account grow. There's plenty of examples in OTL of National not liking a Labour policy, but leaving it in place because it's electoral suicide to axe it. (Working for Families especially)

One thing I see as a possibility is National opening the field for fund managers to operate people's superannuation accounts - perhaps making the Government fund default but allowing people to transfer the balance to a private manager of their choosing? That kinda deflects criticism that they're just as "socialist" as Labour ("it's your savings, you have the right to invest how you want.. all we require is that you invest for the future somehow.")
 
Top