Francesca Rudkin: Paul Henry will provide style over substance to politics

Author: Francesca Rudkin,
Publish Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2026, 10:16am

Follow the podcast on

With Paul Henry standing for ACT, one thing is guaranteed: people will pay attention. Love him or loathe him, Henry knows how to command an audience, and in modern politics that's no small advantage.

New Zealanders likes to think we vote on policy, and we should, but personality has always mattered. John Key's easy-going style, Jacinda Ardern's empathy, and Winston Peters' theatre are contrasting examples of how politicians communicate being just as important as what they say.

I was fortunate enough to sit on TVNZ’s Breakfast TV couch with Paul Henry a couple of times a week for a few years, and saw his strengths up close. He's articulate, quick-thinking, intelligent, confident, fun and fearless in front of a microphone. Those are valuable political skills.

As we’ve seen in the short space of time since he announced his intention to stand as a list candidate for ACT, Henry attracts the kind of media coverage ACT can’t buy, brings fresh attention to the party, and will probably reach voters who wouldn't normally tune into politics. If he made it into Cabinet his communication skills could make him a persuasive minister.

But there's a risk. This is the man who told me I was the size of a whale live on TV when I was pregnant. Twice.

Big personalities can suck the oxygen out of a campaign. David Seymour has spent years carefully building ACT into a significant political force based on consistent messaging and disciplined policy. If every interview becomes about Paul Henry rather than ACT the party, it risks becoming a personality show instead of a political movement. That's a difficult balance for any leader to manage.

Henry will also be a tough character to reign in. It’s a little like dealing with an adolescent - Seymour will need to set some strong boundaries.

If he manages this, then Henry will probably help ACT more than he will hurt it. If Henry accepts that Seymour is the leader and not the supporting act, the two could successfully complement each other - Seymour providing the policy depth, Henry bringing the attention.

As for Labour, National and the other parties, they'd be wise not to focus on Paul Henry. Taking personal shots only feeds the publicity machine - and they’re unlikely to come out on top. Henry has spent decades handling criticism and often thrives on confrontation. If they do need to respond to the Henry machine, the smarter move will be to challenge his policies, question his experience, and let voters decide whether media success automatically translates into political ability.

Ultimately, celebrity may get you elected, but it won't keep you there. New Zealanders enjoy a colourful character, but we also expect substance. Paul Henry will 100% make this general election campaign more entertaining. Whether he can convert attention into effective public service is still up in the air.