What do you think?
Rate this book
Yes, Minister: An Insider's Account of the John Key years
An insightful and entertaining glimpse into what really made the John Key government one of the most successful conservative governments New Zealand has ever seen.
Christopher Finlayson is a lawyer and was a senior minister in the John Key-led National government, serving as Attorney-General, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, and Minister of Arts, Culture and Heritage, as well as the Minister responsible for the Government Communications Security Bureau and Minister in Charge of the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, New Zealand's two main intelligence agencies.
From Chris's early years and time as a lawyer before entering politics - where he spent years fighting for Ngai Tahu, pursuing its treaty claims through a series of high-profile court battles - to entering politics and becoming one of the most senior members of the Key National government, Yes, Minister reveals the inner workings of what it was like to be at the centre of power in New Zealand, and shines a light on the real John Key.
Chris reveals what Key was really like as prime utterly effective and utterly ruthless when needed.
Told with Chris's trademark good humour and wit, this is a thoroughly entertaining and perceptive book, as well as a substantial record of one of the most successful conservative governments in New Zealand.
'Finlayson is unafraid to tackle some deeply contentious issues that still trouble many New Zealanders, such as co-governance and education.' Jane Clifton, The New Zealand Listener
Christopher Finlayson is a lawyer and was a senior minister in the John Key-led National government, serving as Attorney-General, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, and Minister of Arts, Culture and Heritage, as well as the Minister responsible for the Government Communications Security Bureau and Minister in Charge of the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, New Zealand's two main intelligence agencies.
From Chris's early years and time as a lawyer before entering politics - where he spent years fighting for Ngai Tahu, pursuing its treaty claims through a series of high-profile court battles - to entering politics and becoming one of the most senior members of the Key National government, Yes, Minister reveals the inner workings of what it was like to be at the centre of power in New Zealand, and shines a light on the real John Key.
Chris reveals what Key was really like as prime utterly effective and utterly ruthless when needed.
Told with Chris's trademark good humour and wit, this is a thoroughly entertaining and perceptive book, as well as a substantial record of one of the most successful conservative governments in New Zealand.
'Finlayson is unafraid to tackle some deeply contentious issues that still trouble many New Zealanders, such as co-governance and education.' Jane Clifton, The New Zealand Listener
282 pages, Kindle Edition
Published August 16, 2022
16 people are currently reading
52 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
August 22, 2022
Much like the recent Waring and Cullen books basically a long list of events and policies that Finlayson was involved in, with some notes on his thinking both now and at the time. This means it lacks narrative tension (and often repeats itself) but true sickos don’t me don’t really mind that when it also has some good gossip, inside the room detail, and character assassinations.
Finlayson does have a silly habit, perhaps one shared by many, of constantly referring to his opponents as blinkered by their ideology, while making wholly ideologically prejudiced statements himself repeatedly, all sold as common sense. But this is his book, he can write it how he wants.
Finlayson does have a silly habit, perhaps one shared by many, of constantly referring to his opponents as blinkered by their ideology, while making wholly ideologically prejudiced statements himself repeatedly, all sold as common sense. But this is his book, he can write it how he wants.
February 7, 2023
I really enjoyed this book as I am a politics nerd.
September 11, 2022
Shows his slightly refreshing views for a conservative on some social issues but equally has no shame in displaying a clear dislike for the common people.
Like other reviews, a fair bit of repetition and as an account split into themes rather than a timeline or narrative it jumps around a bit. 4 stars, however, for the willingness to offer an inside look at a number of the top brass of the 2008-2017 era. Flings a fair bit of shit at Labour and some of it oozes hypocrisy but alas an intriguing read. The Attorney General chapter was insightful - wonder whether his third book on rule of law will be as much of an easy read?
Like other reviews, a fair bit of repetition and as an account split into themes rather than a timeline or narrative it jumps around a bit. 4 stars, however, for the willingness to offer an inside look at a number of the top brass of the 2008-2017 era. Flings a fair bit of shit at Labour and some of it oozes hypocrisy but alas an intriguing read. The Attorney General chapter was insightful - wonder whether his third book on rule of law will be as much of an easy read?
August 14, 2024
This book had a very amenable reader in me because I find everything about it incredibly interesting: party politics in recent NZ history, the role of attorney-general, the rule of law, treaty settlements. I could devour many more books on these issues.
The book is easy to follow, at times a bit repetitive.
Based on this book, I find Finlayson the lawyer impressive, Finlayson the politician refreshingly honest, and Finlayson the human being quite puzzling. The most confusing contradiction to me is how he can value constructive dialogue above all and convincingly across party lines but then turn around and dismiss for example the entire union movement in the way he does in that book.
The book is easy to follow, at times a bit repetitive.
Based on this book, I find Finlayson the lawyer impressive, Finlayson the politician refreshingly honest, and Finlayson the human being quite puzzling. The most confusing contradiction to me is how he can value constructive dialogue above all and convincingly across party lines but then turn around and dismiss for example the entire union movement in the way he does in that book.
October 25, 2023
Well written and clearly a smart and principled Minister and 'good guy' politician. Book isn't particularly insightful or full of insiders' perspectives, although he is clearly a huge John Key fan.
December 26, 2023
i just wrote such a long review for this then good reads deleted it so i’m removing one star
February 22, 2023
I could finally have proven Annette King wrong when she claimed that the more people I met in Rongotai every election campaign, the higher her majority would be.
Yes, Minister by former attorney-general Chris Finlayson offers an insider’s look on a wide range of events... ...so long as you read “wide range” as “events that I deemed noteworthy but will sometimes incompletely cover as may be politically expedient” (apparently Don Brash just woke up one morning and decided to retire as leader of the National Party).
Finlayson holds a grudge about articles that are so forgotten that his researcher can’t find them on the internet to cite them properly. But… …we do get a pretty good confirmation of his intellect and his contribution to what was stable and relatively popular government from 2008 right up until its demise in 2017.
Genius within Limitations
There are legitimate questions that can be the subject of discussion, provided that discussion is principled and civil.
Finlayson was Attorney-General, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage, Associate Minister of Maori Development, and Minister responsible for NZSIS and GCSB. We can quibble over the details (perhaps the major details on the transparency of the intelligence organisations), but there’s a general sense of competency and care in how Finlayson handled those positions.
Yes, Minister reflects that, as Finlayson clearly and concisely states his points of view on each portfolio. There is a little bit of brushing over the details, like whether it’s a bit weird that an attorney-general might state that a proposed Bill breaches the Bill of Rights Act 1990 and then votes for that Bill, but quibbling over constitutional oddities is a bit mean when he states his view of how an attorney-general should operate so well – it is a set of characteristics to judge other attorney-generals by.
While he apparently covers Māori matters such as treaty negotiations and co-governance in another book, there are very good, possibly even the best, summaries of them that are in readily accessible texts. He defends co-governance as applied to shared maintenance of natural resources while leaving the debate open as to whether it should be applied to other matters. As a specific example, Finlayson places Tuhoe’s stewardship of the Urewera Forest in its proper context of reduced Department of Conservation funding.
Finlayson served in a conservative government during the Global Financial Crisis. His semi-stated position that thriftiness is a virtue is not going to resonate with every reader, nor is there a proper accounting of the Public-Private Partnership Model. However, in itself, I don’t consider that a flaw to his book – he can’t be expected to have a Damascene conversion to heavy boosting of public sector spending at odds with his conduct in government.
Limitations of Genius (redux)
It was incoherent and unprincipled, which is perhaps why the Green party so strongly supported it.
I’ve mentioned before the limits of genius and, in interesting ways, Yes, Minister encapsulates that. There’s no evidence in the composition of the book nor the Acknowledgements that there was a proper editor. I get that Finlayson, a distinguished lawyer who had the cliched “eye for detail” may not have thought he needed one, but there are issues beyond the repetitive clangers like Darren Hughes’ majority in Ōtaki or what a Ngai Tahu elder thinks should be done with controversial statues. Rather, there are matters of personality and omissions of detail.
Finlayson is, frankly, a bit of a grumpy sod. He lists as a regret that he never got to prove how good he could have been hobnobbing around the Rongotai electorate, then about two pages later states the only part of Rongotai that interested him was the sparsely populated Chatham Islands. He is far less subtle in his snarkiness about Jacinda Ardern’s understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi than he thinks he is, but then is practically negligent in his appraisal of the “Hobbit Law” crises, whinging about Rebecca Macfie’s description of Peter Jackson’s political connections while ignoring the substance of Macfie’s summary of the crisis. Labour’s power policy announcing before the Mighty River Power listing was the greatest act of political bastardy he experienced, but what was that policy? Who knows. National’s opponents are often dismissed a bit too brusquely, along with the local politicians and public servants. Two lawyers may have been able to have run 1960s Wellington, but I will wager that 2020s Auckland is a different beast.
And it’s fine to have opinions! I agree the Green Party underutilized Nandor Tanczos and that judges shouldn’t write the law on evidence. Yet there are others that have problems, whether I agree with them. Apparently, Paula Bennett is unfit for National Party leadership roles, but we never learn why. As she’s still fundraising for them, whereas he has stepped away, it is hard to judge his comments without further information. The paedophilia coverups by the Catholic Church gets less space than complaints about bishops’ involvement in social justice, which just comes off as ignorant and unempathetic. Similarly, issues with the culture of law firms not stretching beyond rogues in the profession is either a lie or idiocy.
Of the many immovable and wholly negative people in the trade union movement, the leadership of the teachers' unions would have to rank up there among the worst.
However, these “flaws” don’t actually make the Yes, Minister bad. It’s a personal recollection. It’s Finlayson’s views, and sometimes they are “warts and all”. It’s not a four star book because I agree with virtually everything, it’s a four star book because it’s a coherent, fascinating picture. Ironically, the weaknesses tend to be so obvious that they are not deceptive – you take them as they are and read different sources if you want.
Yes, Minister by former attorney-general Chris Finlayson offers an insider’s look on a wide range of events... ...so long as you read “wide range” as “events that I deemed noteworthy but will sometimes incompletely cover as may be politically expedient” (apparently Don Brash just woke up one morning and decided to retire as leader of the National Party).
Finlayson holds a grudge about articles that are so forgotten that his researcher can’t find them on the internet to cite them properly. But… …we do get a pretty good confirmation of his intellect and his contribution to what was stable and relatively popular government from 2008 right up until its demise in 2017.
Genius within Limitations
There are legitimate questions that can be the subject of discussion, provided that discussion is principled and civil.
Finlayson was Attorney-General, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage, Associate Minister of Maori Development, and Minister responsible for NZSIS and GCSB. We can quibble over the details (perhaps the major details on the transparency of the intelligence organisations), but there’s a general sense of competency and care in how Finlayson handled those positions.
Yes, Minister reflects that, as Finlayson clearly and concisely states his points of view on each portfolio. There is a little bit of brushing over the details, like whether it’s a bit weird that an attorney-general might state that a proposed Bill breaches the Bill of Rights Act 1990 and then votes for that Bill, but quibbling over constitutional oddities is a bit mean when he states his view of how an attorney-general should operate so well – it is a set of characteristics to judge other attorney-generals by.
While he apparently covers Māori matters such as treaty negotiations and co-governance in another book, there are very good, possibly even the best, summaries of them that are in readily accessible texts. He defends co-governance as applied to shared maintenance of natural resources while leaving the debate open as to whether it should be applied to other matters. As a specific example, Finlayson places Tuhoe’s stewardship of the Urewera Forest in its proper context of reduced Department of Conservation funding.
Finlayson served in a conservative government during the Global Financial Crisis. His semi-stated position that thriftiness is a virtue is not going to resonate with every reader, nor is there a proper accounting of the Public-Private Partnership Model. However, in itself, I don’t consider that a flaw to his book – he can’t be expected to have a Damascene conversion to heavy boosting of public sector spending at odds with his conduct in government.
Limitations of Genius (redux)
It was incoherent and unprincipled, which is perhaps why the Green party so strongly supported it.
I’ve mentioned before the limits of genius and, in interesting ways, Yes, Minister encapsulates that. There’s no evidence in the composition of the book nor the Acknowledgements that there was a proper editor. I get that Finlayson, a distinguished lawyer who had the cliched “eye for detail” may not have thought he needed one, but there are issues beyond the repetitive clangers like Darren Hughes’ majority in Ōtaki or what a Ngai Tahu elder thinks should be done with controversial statues. Rather, there are matters of personality and omissions of detail.
Finlayson is, frankly, a bit of a grumpy sod. He lists as a regret that he never got to prove how good he could have been hobnobbing around the Rongotai electorate, then about two pages later states the only part of Rongotai that interested him was the sparsely populated Chatham Islands. He is far less subtle in his snarkiness about Jacinda Ardern’s understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi than he thinks he is, but then is practically negligent in his appraisal of the “Hobbit Law” crises, whinging about Rebecca Macfie’s description of Peter Jackson’s political connections while ignoring the substance of Macfie’s summary of the crisis. Labour’s power policy announcing before the Mighty River Power listing was the greatest act of political bastardy he experienced, but what was that policy? Who knows. National’s opponents are often dismissed a bit too brusquely, along with the local politicians and public servants. Two lawyers may have been able to have run 1960s Wellington, but I will wager that 2020s Auckland is a different beast.
And it’s fine to have opinions! I agree the Green Party underutilized Nandor Tanczos and that judges shouldn’t write the law on evidence. Yet there are others that have problems, whether I agree with them. Apparently, Paula Bennett is unfit for National Party leadership roles, but we never learn why. As she’s still fundraising for them, whereas he has stepped away, it is hard to judge his comments without further information. The paedophilia coverups by the Catholic Church gets less space than complaints about bishops’ involvement in social justice, which just comes off as ignorant and unempathetic. Similarly, issues with the culture of law firms not stretching beyond rogues in the profession is either a lie or idiocy.
Of the many immovable and wholly negative people in the trade union movement, the leadership of the teachers' unions would have to rank up there among the worst.
However, these “flaws” don’t actually make the Yes, Minister bad. It’s a personal recollection. It’s Finlayson’s views, and sometimes they are “warts and all”. It’s not a four star book because I agree with virtually everything, it’s a four star book because it’s a coherent, fascinating picture. Ironically, the weaknesses tend to be so obvious that they are not deceptive – you take them as they are and read different sources if you want.
September 13, 2022
Perhaps written to close to his time in office and his political bias is showed through as a result. His devotion to the law went a long way to surmount this
Glimpses of his social conscience shone out at times and I enjoyed his sometimes cynical sense of humour
Glimpses of his social conscience shone out at times and I enjoyed his sometimes cynical sense of humour
October 22, 2022
Well worth reading. I liked the references to people without significant profile such as Peter Mckenzie. It is a helpful contextual piece for those of us who have to wrestle with the legacy of his decisions and agreements. The arrogance of the legal mind shines through!
January 24, 2026
Christopher Finlayson is conservative and conventional, a lawyer engaged in politics from the last decades of the twentieth century and the first decades of the twenty-first. This memoir focuses mainly on his time as New Zealand's Attorney-General.
Although his politics are not mine, I appreciated his respect and appreciation he recorded for some of the other political players over this time who stood at the opposite end of the political spectrum from him. It was also quite a reminder, and clear from Finlayson's recollections, that at the close of the twentieth century New Zealand was still in the hands of "the boys club".
Although I found the repetition within the book to be clumsy, and Finlayson's persistence in highlighting his own contributions came over to me at times as false modesty, (I suspect that his vanity may have led him to rebut any editorial suggestions along these lines) I couldn't help but wish for the National Party of old - it's contribution to the treaty process, willingness to participate and support co-governance, support for the "rule of law" and its members deeper and more thoughtful understanding of their portfolios, New Zealand history and social context. At the time I couldn't wait for the Key era to end, the straight-laced Christian conservatives hand-in-hand with the ex-trader repelled me. However, confronted with the anarchic, dismissive, soulless coalition we are currently governed by, and the horrible, shouting, angry, bullying, dominating rhetoric of the current political environment, I would willingly turn back the pages. Finlayson's snide take-downs of selected colleagues and opponents are tame and well mannered in comparison to the current political climate.
I was left with an overriding sentiment that Finlayson wrote the book to ensure his time in parliament, and his role as the A-G (pinnacle of his legal career?) were recorded for prosperity, rather than denoting any events of major historical significance. All the same, it was a more interesting "vanity project" than many, and I'm left with a quiet respect for the man.
Although his politics are not mine, I appreciated his respect and appreciation he recorded for some of the other political players over this time who stood at the opposite end of the political spectrum from him. It was also quite a reminder, and clear from Finlayson's recollections, that at the close of the twentieth century New Zealand was still in the hands of "the boys club".
Although I found the repetition within the book to be clumsy, and Finlayson's persistence in highlighting his own contributions came over to me at times as false modesty, (I suspect that his vanity may have led him to rebut any editorial suggestions along these lines) I couldn't help but wish for the National Party of old - it's contribution to the treaty process, willingness to participate and support co-governance, support for the "rule of law" and its members deeper and more thoughtful understanding of their portfolios, New Zealand history and social context. At the time I couldn't wait for the Key era to end, the straight-laced Christian conservatives hand-in-hand with the ex-trader repelled me. However, confronted with the anarchic, dismissive, soulless coalition we are currently governed by, and the horrible, shouting, angry, bullying, dominating rhetoric of the current political environment, I would willingly turn back the pages. Finlayson's snide take-downs of selected colleagues and opponents are tame and well mannered in comparison to the current political climate.
I was left with an overriding sentiment that Finlayson wrote the book to ensure his time in parliament, and his role as the A-G (pinnacle of his legal career?) were recorded for prosperity, rather than denoting any events of major historical significance. All the same, it was a more interesting "vanity project" than many, and I'm left with a quiet respect for the man.
November 3, 2022
Interesting at times
It is always interesting to find out stuff about our politicians from the inside. Finlayson dishes up quite a lot at times and he is quite open about who he liked and disliked. He adored John Key but was possibly disappointed he was not a close confidant of Key. He utterly disliked Amy Adams and considered Paula Bennett useless. Much of this book is a detailed account of legal work he did before entering parliament, which becomes less fascinating as the pages go on. Finlayson is smart and made an enormous contribution in his role as treaty settlements minister, which possibly created tension between him and other members of National in parliament. He left abruptly after his valedictorian speech and was probably not missed at the after-function.
Interesting at times best sums up my response to Finlayson's soul-purge in this book.
It is always interesting to find out stuff about our politicians from the inside. Finlayson dishes up quite a lot at times and he is quite open about who he liked and disliked. He adored John Key but was possibly disappointed he was not a close confidant of Key. He utterly disliked Amy Adams and considered Paula Bennett useless. Much of this book is a detailed account of legal work he did before entering parliament, which becomes less fascinating as the pages go on. Finlayson is smart and made an enormous contribution in his role as treaty settlements minister, which possibly created tension between him and other members of National in parliament. He left abruptly after his valedictorian speech and was probably not missed at the after-function.
Interesting at times best sums up my response to Finlayson's soul-purge in this book.
January 7, 2023
The best two chapters of this book are the last two. In the second last, Finlayson describes the infighting that crippled the National Party opposition in the years after 2017. He gives an interesting account of what happened behind the scenes. It is not quite an insider’s view because by this stage it seems he had been marginalised in the shadow cabinet, but at least it was a close-up, front-row seat type of view. In the final chapter he makes the argument that the state grew too much during the pandemic but a large, spendthrift state is not that answer to New Zealand’s problems. Unfortunately, the rest of the book is rather scrappy, with lots of digressions and superficial accounts of events that took place during his time in office.
July 3, 2023
Quite a good read, a few good analyses of different National ministers and their issues. Really good section on the Attorney General's role and the rule of law. Could have done with more editing, he repeats himself multiple times throughout the book. contradicts himself a few times, praising the work of the state (eg fibre rollout) but in the next chapter saying Thatcher and Douglas saved both countries - arguable.
July 23, 2023
It’s been a while since I read a political memoir and I really enjoyed this one. A high level overview of key events during his time as a minister, plus some reflection on more recent political events. At times a bit too effusive in his praise of particular people, but equally an honest criticism of others within his own party.
October 9, 2022
3.5 stars. There's a bit of repetition but it serves the stated goal of providing a sketch of his time in politics. It's enjoyably snarky at points, casts light on characters from the Key era and it's fascinating to see the Minister's take on some issues that I worked on.
August 1, 2023
inspiring political memoir
Solid account of the Key government through the eyes of Chris Finlayson . It is an impressive read and reveals some of the strong character Finlayson bought to the role and opportunities for reform that still remain.
Solid account of the Key government through the eyes of Chris Finlayson . It is an impressive read and reveals some of the strong character Finlayson bought to the role and opportunities for reform that still remain.
September 6, 2022
What should be an intelligent, well-researched account, often descends into name-calling and posturing.
October 3, 2022
Interesting read very informative & well written
October 19, 2022
An interesting read with a good dose of snarkiness.
May 19, 2023
Easy read and summary of hos 10 years in politics
Read
December 28, 2023Unrated due to political differences. Interesting insights into why nationals candidate selection has been so poor in the last decade. Lots of repetition.
April 7, 2024
Dad left it out for me to read, did not enjoy it. Felt it was used as a platform to show off on the fancy work he did in office and flex his law degree.
November 21, 2022
I particularly enjoyed reading about Chris' time as Attorney General. Some more details would have been fun, but I am a law nerd and I suppose others would not have enjoyed that so much. It was also fascinating hearing about Chris' work in Treaty negotiations, and as Minister of the Spooks. There some nice nuggets of gossip interspersed throughout - Chris speaks his mind, and it is clear who he does and does not like. It is a deeply personal/political account of events, and so Chris glorifies and throws scorn in ways that will make many readers roll their eyes - but this is not a fault, just a fact of political autobiographies. Fun levels of snark and humour are included to lighten up parts which might be dry to some. 4.5 stars, rounded up.
October 24, 2022
I quite enjoyed the fact Finlayson was able to be objective and commend those who did a good job, regardless of where they sat on the ideological spectrum. He writes in the way lawyers often speak, and that may put off regular readers, but overall I have a newfound respect for Finlayson - both with regards to his dedication to the rule of law, and his work in the area of Treaty settlements. I found it enjoyable.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews