With the polls narrowly backing a National/ACT government, National should have the confidence to come out from the shadows and more positively assert its own agenda
Opinion: Passive aggression to protect its legacy was the order of the day at Labour's recent election year congress. The focus was more on the prospect of a National/ACT government and what current policies it might overturn than what a re-elected Labour-led government would do.
It clearly implied a Labour Party not at all confident it will still be in government after the election. But more aggressively, it also sought to challenge National to spell out where it stands on key issues such as the age of eligibility for New Zealand superannuation, ongoing government contributions to KiwiSaver accounts and the superannuation fund, and the future of support mechanisms such as the winter energy payment.
READ MORE:
* Luxon’s ‘coalition of chaos’ may yet come to pass
* Hipkins must stop side-stepping key coalition concerns
* National should have been well ahead of Labour by now
* National’s lack of passion smacks of languid complacency
That continues the approach Hipkins has taken since becoming Prime Minister – keeping Labour's powder dry by dropping unpopular policies, while challenging National to say where it stands on just about everything else. And, so far, it has worked – National has taken the bait every time. There is now every chance the election will be fought on Labour's terms, with National looking increasingly trapped in the headlights.
The result is that five months from the election there is no real sense of what a new National-led government might do in office. Even when the party has tried to differentiate itself from Labour it has made a complete botch of things – the prescription charges debacle must be the year's worst political miscalculation so far.
Struggling to retain office, he will be more ruthless in seeking to trip up National whenever and wherever he can. He will be aiming to turn the election into a contest of not so much who do you trust, but rather who do you dislike least?
Not far behind was last week's absurd railing against bilingual road signs. That not only demonstrated extraordinary ignorance (other bilingual countries – Ireland, Canada, and Wales, for example – have no problem with such signs), but also showed how out of touch National was in even thinking this was a major problem.
In the absence of any programme of its own, National is being defined by what it initially appears to be against (abolishing prescription charges, bilingual road signs, and so on) rather than what it is for. This is exactly as Hipkins has wanted all year – National looking as though it is against everything and for nothing.
But for all that and National's seeming inability to avoid Labour’s traps, Labour’s strategy is still risky. It implies there is little else left in Labour’s armoury. However, it cannot rely on National falling into Labour’s traps indefinitely. Indeed, there are already signs National is getting the message. For example, walking away from the housing density accord is more a case of National beating Labour to the punch in getting out first from what was becoming an increasingly unworkable agreement.
Moreover, the opinion polls – briefly improving for Labour in February/March – have reverted to their long-term trend, showing a National/ACT government is still the more likely, although by no means yet certain, election outcome. If that mood continues and intensifies, Labour will find the public tiring of the "what National might overturn" line and will be wanting to know instead what Labour and the Greens will do if they are re-elected. Given Labour’s mixed performance to date, that will be a far more difficult question for Hipkins and his colleagues to answer persuasively.
The impact of increased government spending on the cost-of-living crisis and rising interest rates is already concerning voters. Labour remains unrepentant about its high spending, countering that National needs to spell out which critical services it will cut to fund its planned tax cuts. But a recent public opinion poll suggests that argument may no longer be cutting the ice with voters, with a clear majority (52 percent to 35 percent) favouring tax cuts.
So, Labour pushing spending over tax cuts may be getting out of line with voters’ thinking. Yet, with time running out before the election – it is a little over four weeks before the “period of restraint” begins (the time before an election when governments do not initiate significant new policies) – Labour now has few other options left.
For its part, National can afford to dangle the tax cuts carrot before voters for a little longer, given the apparent public support for them. But the time is coming when National will have to spell out precisely its plans, and how they will be funded. It may well have a slight upper hand in the tax cuts debate for now, but to sustain that it will need to develop a package that is seen to be fair, and not pandering to just those at the upper ends of the income scale. This will be even more important if Labour proceeds with plans for a more redistributive and populist tax policy based on capital gains and wealth taxes.
Following the Labour congress the likely tone of the coming election has become a little clearer. Hipkins is an uncompromising streetfighter, unlike Ardern of 2017 and 2020. Struggling to retain office, he will be more ruthless in seeking to trip up National whenever and wherever he can. He will be aiming to turn the election into a contest of not so much who do you trust, but rather who do you dislike least?
To counter that, Luxon and National need to be far more disciplined and focused than they have been so far. They cannot afford any more policy slip-ups, U-turns, or silly announcements. National needs to continue the process of agenda-setting it has started through the housing density issue. Its message needs to be sharpened further, then promoted unflinchingly and relentlessly, regardless of Labour’s barbs.
For the time being at least, the polls show the public is narrowly on National/ACT’s side. That should give National confidence to come out from the shadows and more positively assert its own agenda, rather than continuing to take Labour’s bait. But it also means Labour’s attacks, as shown at the congress, will become more pronounced and aggressive.
As for voters, they will simply want to be certain they know what each party will do if leading the next government, not what games they may be playing.
