Skilled Diplomacy in Europe contrasts with Great Leap Forward stumbles at home

The Labour coalition’s mainstream doctrinal base-reinforcing schemes such as the hydrocarbons shutdown, the mass housing build, and the mass afforestation scheme now have the Great Leap Forward dream-over-reality look. In contrast though the coalition’s less dogma-cluttered handling of the Brexit opportunity demonstrates a clarity of intent and thus of management.

In Brexit the conflicting doctrines are self-balancing and this has allowed the Labour coalition a free field of fire to do what it does best which is to resonate sincerity of purpose and keep on the right side of the angels, or as premier Jacinda Ardern told Davos position itself on the “right side of history.”

It is here that foreign minister Winston Peters, the least angelic of the coalition galaxy, has been at the helm in navigating the correct course for the onetime Empire food supplying nation to resume its historic role.

Indeed, the Labour government’s own base, now largely comprised of people who have never held proper jobs in a productive sense, are mercifully unaware of the practical and mercantile course that Winston Peters, now a latter-day Great Helmsman himself, has followed.

The appearance at places such as London and Davos of New Zealand Labour government representatives has been a godsend to British premier Theresa May and all other Brexiteers.

The reason is that the prospect of a starving Britain outside the EU is the main ballistic missile in the armoury of the Remainers.

The presence of these New Zealand politicians, and especially of an increasingly avuncular-looking Winston Peters, is proof that there is an ample larder awaiting Britain outside the EU.

In other words the New Zealand presence, and rather surprisingly to a rather greater degree than that of Australia, neutralises Project Fear.

It is here that the nation’s official virtue signalling and among such archangels as Sir David Attenborough and Prince William at places like Davos has applied economic value.

The Labour coalition is prevented from showboating its deft handling of the Brexit opportunity. It must for example signal an impression of indifference as to whether Britain stays or leaves, or has another referendum.

It knows that Britain will have to quit, and if necessary operate under WTO rules which are designed exactly for this type of contingency.

It knows too that the China market is becoming increasingly uncertain, and even dangerous as the Fonterra experience in the Beingmate project has demonstrated.

Indeed as far as the UK is concerned, officials in recent times have pointed out to the coalition the accelerating over-production of foodstuffs from the EU exacerbated by staples coming off the once tightly-maintained EU production quotas.

A Britain outside the EU has for the Labour coalition exactly the same appeal and possibilities that China once had in the Helen Clark era.