Why did Bob go? 10 observations

1. CEO not a poli.
2. Marryatt and Consents
3. Endless negativity and character assassination
4. The Press
5. Polls
6. Wife and “well-being”
7. Reputation and legacy
8. Communication
9. Transferred frustration
10. Media prostitutes.

In a universally well-received and deeply dignified, emotional, yet surprise announcement he will not contest the 2013 mayoral contest, Bob Parker, the man with one of the hardest jobs in NZ just now, is bowing out.

Hypocritically, now everyone loves Bob Parker and all-and-sundry are lauding his qualities, even Lianne Dalziel. There are moist eyes.  It’s ironic to cynical ol’ me, however, that opponents can’t acknowledge these things while his hand is to the plough and life literally dropping buildings on him.

There is no question, as Cr Glenn Livingstone has said, it was not a decision that came lightly.  It was also something that came fresh. Only a few days ago, Bob was on, and ready to take on Lianne Dalziel. He had many local supporters (and others in NZ and abroad, already working to help, often in different timezones). He had already gathered an informal campaign strategy team.

So, why did this happen?

1. Bob is a CEO, not really a hurly-burly campaigner. The words “CEO” or “Chairman” came up a lot during his retirement speech on CampbellLIve. He was not relishing the inevitable dirty tricks and scuttlebutt campaign already heading his way like a nor-west arch from the Red Left in Christchurch.  We’ve seen all this before, ad nauseam with Anderton’s rent-a-mob and the other liberal machinations in our city. We see the same individuals again and again, posing as ‘ratepayers’ outraged at various things, wearing different hats, but really just dyed-in-the-wool party activists posing as other things.

We just don’t do this as much on the center-right (we might trample someone's roses! A sign on my fence? how crass!). So our liberal colleagues get a much easier run in politics, because we tend to play the issues rather than the person, are much less rabid, and have a stronger sense of civil decorum. Shouting is vulgar. It gets personal and nasty from that side. Bob is above all that and just wants to work with people committed to Christchurch.  Unfortunately some are more committed to a political tribe.  Bob is a pseudo of sorts, not a Machiavelli or a street brawler.

2. There is no doubt the consents issue was a left-field hit to the side of the head.  While it was survivable, Bob had tied his career very much to Tony Marryatt. That weighed him down politically like concrete feet in liquefaction.  He would have felt betrayed and let down. That saps motivation.

3. The endless negativity and character assassination has obviously worn away at the mayor, who has been under considerable stress with his city literally in tatters.  Some of the more reprehensible and vile garbage was against his very kind, gentle and attractive wife Jo, led by failed ‘editor’ and excrement-monger Cameron Slater, among others.

4. The Press appears to have been running a concerted and partisan campaign against Bob; this announcement takes the wind out of their sails.  It caught them flat-footed, which is why Bob went to Campbell, not The Press, to make his announcement.  I think Bob realised he was going to have to fight both The Press and Dalziel. This is born out by the second front Bob opened on Fb and a new blogsite, putting right many facts ill-reported byThe Press, or not reported at all, giving an incomplete story that seemed to paint him in an unfair way.

5. The Press has run a series of polls, some very dubious [see here Christchurch Mayoral Polls So Far (3)]. They have held back on announcing Bob’s consistent leads, waiting I think for a result that showed Dalziel in a better light.  Apparently that came a day ago, 70-30 in favour of Dalziel (something totally inconsistent with all the other polls averaged out) but it was perhaps an indication to Parker, that The Press would have kept up this ‘death by a thousand cuts’ campaign, manipulating public opinion (their first poll was a travesty…they selectively emailed the respondents) to bring him down. Some believed they wanted to elevate another. Let’s see if The Press now exposes Lianne Dalziel to scrutiny for her many public failures, too. Don’t hold your breath.

6. Personally, Bob doesn’t need this and mentioned this in his announcement (“well-being“). He owes his supportive wife some time and emphasis, and has mentioned his genuine awareness of this fact to me and others, before (also in his Campbell interview). It is something that has been sacrificed over the last six years.  I believe this to be a genuine reason that, coupled with the other things mentioned, is what helped Bob make this decision himself, that perhaps no one else was privy to. After they were together, Jo once saw an early This Is Your Life promo photo of Bob with his large spectacles and said, “Oh, do you know that guy?”  “I am that guy.” It was never about the celebrity for Mrs Parker. There’s so much more to life than politics. The Parkers are cultured, artistic, musical creative people with a wide circle of friends.

7. Reputation and legacy. FInally, I think some detractors are right.  Everyone acknowledges Bob’s incredible performance after the major quakes, but tarnished and despoiled somewhat by the myopia of the quake rebuild difficulties (the Brownlee clown comment; the consents betrayal; the dysfunctional infighting of other Councillors). In the end, the mayor has chosen to step away from this and finish on a high, with his reputation in tact.  People will forget the argy-bargy and recall his dignity and resolve in this city, mid-crisis.

The ability to make that call is an act of leadership.  Bob Parker is not a ‘hold on at all costs’ type politician like, say Jim Anderton, but a person of focus outside the politics and more on the challengers. Many people unfortunately are tribal, ill-informed on the issues, and prefer cliches, catch-phrases and myths.  We can see this from the muted response from The Press over the massive $4.8 billion spend in Christchurch that Parker (and Marryatt for that matter) have been at the core of negotiating. Set against that, was the imbalanced trumpeting the same week of some minor report the mayor didn’t read, amid a gazillion other reports any CEO will not read in toto.

8. The Mayor has made mistakes, like everyone (Key, Brownlee, Dalziel, Clinton, Bush, Obama). But on balance, he has been a good mayor.  ‘Communication” has come up a lot, but principally as a criticism from ‘young Turks’ that really meant ‘you haven’t communicated enough with me! I am important!!’ Some have expectations of more power and credence than they deserve initially and have leveled that dissatisfaction at Parker.  That is the inevitable price of real leadership.  Sailers always mutter as they work the ropes. The mayor had the magnanimity to give one of his most public young critics a senior and responsible chairmanship. That Councilor failed publicly and spectacularly.  Bob said nothing. The Cr. did not fall on his sword.

9. Transferred frustration. If elected, Lianne Dalziel – and I note she is already promising jobs – will suffer the same criticisms as Parker.  It will take her a while to come to grips with the very real and complex issues facing Christchurch if elected. If she, or anyone else is unable to get up to speed, the negativity will flow like eastside liquefaction.  Much of it is transference from other earthquake frustrations, whether Parker or Dalziel, it makes no difference.

In that sense the Christchurch mayoralty is a poisoned chalice.

10. Media prostitutes. I’ve been reasonably close to events. We all know Bob is ego-centric, who isn’t? He’s a media man after all (the unkind moniker ‘Sideshow Bob’ stuck). Media is one of the things he does best, some were jealous. (Bob was involved in amateur dramatics which is where he met his artistic wife).  He’s a bit of a control freak, many of us are, but overall my perspective of Bob Parker is of a man of dignity and peace; who in the end was tired of the bickering and petty party point scoring; and the constant negativity, while he got on with the unsexy, unseen hard work on detail and issues that many Cr.s should have bent their backs to instead of being ‘run-to-Mummy’ media prostitutes, undermining their colleagues, collectivity, and ultimately, Christchurch.

Christchurch commentator John Stringer posts at coNZervative.