RUDE AWAKENING
LIKE the sands through the hourglass — it has taken just four short weeks for Jacinda Ardern’s ‘‘campaign of our lives’’ to become more akin to the The Days of
Our Lives.
Labour’s Wonder Woman has found herself cast in a longrunning soap opera — but not as a super hero.
The National Partyscripted plot never varies from one election to the next, but the show never fails to draw big ratings.
Once again, Labour has been tripped up over tax policy. The only difference this time is that the major Opposition party has been even more helpful by having a whole range of new taxes in its manifesto. The puzzle is why alarm bells did not ring at Labour’s headquarters, given the scale of the free gift.
Maybe everyone was too consumed with playing the equivalent of Russian roulette by trying to sneak a capital gains tax past voters without them noticing.
The tax was the early product of Ms Ardern’s Brave New World — a world where she intends demonstrating Labour can make the hard decisions.
It took precious little time for Labour to back off the idea as fast as decency allowed. ‘‘Let’s do this’’ became ‘‘Let’s not do that’’.
Much of Ms Ardern’s amazing rapport with voters has sprung from her being something of a female version of John Key — approachable, open, down to earth, not judgemental, and arrogancefree.
But there is one major difference between them. She has insisted any government she runs will listen and then act. It will lead, not follow.
Of particular note has been her declaration that she will not shy away from tackling the ‘‘big generational issues’’.
They do not come any bigger or more vexed than the fairness of the country’s tax system and the affordability of current statefunded pension entitlements. With regard to the latter, she has gone Awol.
She has adopted John Key’s pledge to resign as prime minister if the age of eligibility for New Zealand Superannuation was to be raised under her watch and likewise if there was to be any reduction in current entitlements enjoyed by those who qualify for the state pension.
For someone portraying themselves as giving voice to younger voters, such a stance is an absolute copout.
Ms Ardern has made assurances that Labour will restore the annual payments into the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, whose purpose is to meet the shortfall in funding to pay the burgeoning cost of the pension as the population ages.
That might be fine if Labour could guarantee it will be in power for the next 30 to 40 years without interruption.
It can make no such assurance, of course.
Relying on National to feed the fund is optimism at its most hopeless. Despite wallowing in deep surpluses, the ruling party has opted to postpone the resumption of contributions for another three years.
Ms Ardern’s ducking the matter has been completely overshadowed by the Uturn on a capital gains tax, however.
Some would argue she is deserving of huge credit for having tried to speed the implementation of a measure which organisations as unalike as the International
Monetary Fund and the Green Party agree is essential.
Ms Ardern and Grant Robertson, Labour’s finance spokesman, have sought to play down the change of mind that will see any such tax subject to receiving a mandate from voters at the 2020 election, rather than being implemented before then.
The mauling that Labour received from National this week was a reminder enough of how politically poisonous such a measure remains.
The attempt to shortcircuit the usual process for introducing a reform of such magnitude is likely to prove to be wholly counterproductive.
Who in their right political mind is going to go into bat for the measure at the 2020 election?
Ms Ardern and Mr Robertson have killed off any chance of a capital gains tax making it on to the statute books for the foreseeable future.
Given the desperate need for such an asset tax to remove the distortions which encourage investment in nonproductive sectors such as residential property, that is a disaster for the country.
It should also be a big and timely lesson for Labour’s leader in the art of the possible. And that substance is exponentially more important than mere style.