In realistic terms, just about everyone will have forgotten by the time of the next scheduled general election Labour Party leader Phil Goff's "apology" for the government (of which he was a senior member under Helen Clark) not listening to people about their priorities.
The Clark government, he said, had become "distracted" and he acknowledged Labour was voted out of office not for what it did that was right, but because of the sideshows - the "anti-smacking" Bill, the Electoral Finance Act, toying with compulsory energy-efficient light bulbs and monitoring hot water use, to which must be added an obsession to dig up dirt on its opponents.
It was necessary for Mr Goff, speaking to his first party conference as its leader, to pronounce detachment from the past, and, as Helen Clark did in 1999 of the Lange/Douglas years, admit to wrongs and plead for the opportunity to "win back the trust of New Zealanders".
To a large extent, Mr Goff's speech was for party consumption: without the broad church of support from Labour's factions he has no chance of remaining leader.
Hence, it was necessary for him to outline the kind of party he wished to lead and in this regard he tried to further detach it from the worst aspects of the Clark "nanny state" pattern.
It seemed to be a matter of back to old Labour: a commitment to jobs and the modern economy needed to sustain them; to high standards of health and education; to a belief in strong communities, standards all political leaders claim.
He promised to ensure Labour would not be judgemental and would help "working New Zealanders".
It would stop electricity retailer price gouging and oppose further privatisation of the power companies; and ensure there were redundancy provisions in employment agreements.
Of greater interest than the usual political platitudes was Mr Goff's declaration that "when the Government is working constructively, we will work with them".
This was an acknowledgement of the sentiment of many voters who want to see the political parties working together rather than constantly opposing each other - a point the Prime Minister may find reinforced when he carries out the promised referendum on MMP.
But if Mr Goff talked of this being a time for renewal of Labour, he must be challenged on whether he suitably represents the face of renewal.
He is certainly one of Labour's "old guard" and usually thought to represent such remnants of traditional Labour as still exist; the presence of a new party president in unionist Andrew Little reinforces the notion.
Stunts like appearing in Rotorua on a motorbike, however, fall into the same farcical category as Don Brash pretending to be a racing car driver.
Younger voters are not fooled or even impressed by such public relations inanity.
If Mr Goff and Labour are to again "earn confidence in our values, confidence in our ideas" the leader must also "show New Zealanders we are relevant to them".
In a quite telling comment to Mr Goff on his mea culpa, the retiring Greens leader, Jeanette Fitzsimons, said it was not Labour's message that was at fault, it was that "when you developed innovative policies you didn't take people with you".
It was perhaps unfortunate - only hindsight will likely prove the point - that Mr Goff compared himself to the All Blacks coach as a man under pressure heading towards 2011.
An apology for trivial matters goes no way towards explaining why the Clark government took its eye off the economic ball in its third term; why Labour thought itself justified in having the taxpayers - those "workers" Mr Goff mentioned - unknowingly help fund its election campaign in 2005; why it did nothing effective about the charlatans in the finance industry; acted so slowly over the "leaky homes" disaster; and failed to intervene in electricity industry profiteering.
But - like Mr Goff - that is looking into the past: voters want leaders who embrace the future.
Come the next election, Labour's present leadership will not represent a fresh young face to an electorate of which more than half will be under 50.
The chief problem Mr Goff faces is the one of personal relevance.
The public does not care about either him or his party at the moment, to judge by the polls, and Labour's 14 new MPs and the revitalising of its younger membership - along with the appearance of an ancient Labour ghost, Jim Anderton, offering alms - are unlikely to be sufficient to turn that widely held opinion around by 2011.
