When Frankiln D. Roosevelt in July 1933 coined the phrase “first 100 days”, those first few months were already done and dusted. He was looking back over a start to his presidency that had seen him call Congress into urgent session, during which time it had passed 15 major new laws. While some were more successful than others, they pushed back against the Great Depression and sparked new hope and ecomic activity.
The National-ACT-New Zealand First government made much its 100 day plan, which Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has repeatedly described as “ambitious”. Luxon likes to say things, like his government will “deliver and get things done” and “work incredibly quickly”.
So as the year comes to a close and we reflect on the first stage of this new government’s life, how’s it looking so far?
Well, 24 days into its government, parliament has closed and MPs have gone on holiday for more than a month. Most of the legislative work thus far has been to repeal laws and stop things. And, many voters may be surprised to learn, most of the actual changes promised are months – if not years – away. This National-led government’s big promise, its point of difference from the previous lot, was delivery. But if the 100 Day Plan has done nothing else, it has suggested the current lot are going to struggle just as much as the last.
To be fair, a few of its actions have been prompt: The so-called “ute tax” – a subsidy for low emission vehicles funded by taxing high emission imports – will be gone on December 31. Fair Pay agreements have been repealed, effewctive December 20. The first law the government passed was repealing the Reserve Bank’s dual mandate of inflation and employment, returning it to its pre-2018 focus on inflation alone.
Sidebar: It was an odd priority, given experts tend to agree that even with a single mandate, its approach to price stability since 2018 would have been nigh identical to what it did. What’s more, this law was passed with support from New Zealand First, whose leader Winston Peters just 11 years ago introduced a private members bills demanding the opposite. Back then he was concerned about the high New Zealand dollar and attacked the Bank’s “myopic obsession” with inflation.
But – back to the 100 Day Plan – most of the promises involve large globs of smoke, mirrors and spin. Lots of promises to do something later. It looks like National’s promise to get the country back on track will be a wee way down the track.
One of the defining aspects of National’s election camapign was its heavy reliance on slogans and Luxon’s and Willis’ refusal to go off-script to discuss policy and debate ideas. They would repeat scripted lines ad nauseum. They have started in government much the same way.
It’s noteworthy that National’s two senior leaders have corporate backgrounds where “messaging” and “comms” prevail as a way to talk to “stakeholders”. No-one seems to have explained to them yet that speaking to citizens in a democracy requires a different approach.
In truth, the 100 Day Plan might be better called ‘the great undoing’. This is a Do-over government like none before. In the past, New Zeaand has been saved the curse of great pendulum swings as governments come and go. Arguably it’s one of the blessings of short, three-year terms. Parties have tended to accept the bulk of a previous government’s manifesto and moved on. Not this time.
Luxon and co have deified the previous Key government and seem to want to return us to 2015. (Which is interesting given Winston Peters was railing against it from the Opposition benches). Regardless of what you think of the Key years and what’s happened since, pendulum-swing governments are bad for a country long-term. Let’s hope the do-over approach of the sixth National government is a blip, not a trend.
So what does it want to undo, precisely? Central to its “ambitious” list of plan to stop things are removing Auckland’s regional fuel tax, repealing three waters laws, stopping work on Auckland’s light rail, repealing RMA reforms, and stopping the Lake Onslow scheme.
For all Luxon’s words about working incredibly quickly, unpacking some of these laws will eat up millions of public servants’ hours and heaps of National’s political capital in its first term.
Much like the 100 Day Plan, Nicola Willis’ mini-budget this week hints at urgency and the ghosts of mini-budgets past. But while Ruth Richardson came in with a howitzer, Willis deployed more of a bow and arrow.
Her big moves announced in her statement? “Confirming the Government’s commitment to fully restoring interest deductibility for rental properties, with details of the phasing of this commitment to be the subject of an announcement in the New Year”.
Oh, and, “progressing work to deliver meaningful income tax reduction in next year’s Budget” or “continuing to uphold the commitment in the ACT-National Coalition Agreement to consider the concepts of ACT’s income tax policy”. “Progressing”? “Confirming”?
The Labour-led government was not unfairly ridiculed at times for announcing announcements and failing to act. But I struggle to remember a statement from them promising to continue a commitment to consider a concept.
While the new government’s main “delivery” thus far has been slogans and promises to get round to its promised repeals next year, it has also been buying into a fistful of fights. With the health sector over smokefree legislation; with environmentalists over mining on the conservation estate; with China over AUKUS; with Maori over te reo, treaty principles and affirmative action programmes; and with KiwiRail over the Cook Strait ferries.
All of this has – within just a few weeks – prompted questions about this government’s experience and discipline, usually National’s strong points. Each of those issues could consume huge chunks of political attention and capital with very little delivery for your average voter or impact on the cost of living.
And if, for example, the three water repeal means higher rates and the tax deductibility changes mean higher house prices, the money back into people’s pockets - the centrepiece of National’s campaign - could soon disappear back out of those pockets, leaving some very aggrieved voters.
National in Opposition liked to use accuse Labour and the Greens (and New Zealand First 2017-20) of “virtue signalling”. A lot. The Child Poverty Action bill, feminism, the gender split in boardrooms, refugee policy, Healthy Homes, the offshore drilling ban... all were examples of virtue signalling, according to National. Yet look at the headlines around this government in just one month – stopping higher pay for public servants who learn te reo, promises to make English an official language and require public service agencies to have their first name in English, gender-based funding for grassroots sports, going to “war” with the media and more. The risk of distraction and chasing rabbits down holes in 2024 looom large.
As politicians up sticks and begin their summer break, the clock is still ticking on the government’s 100 Day Plan. It runs out on March 7. With so much fuss having been made about this timeframe and this government promising to be the great deliverers, voters will be waiting with interest to see come summer’s end precisely how much has been delivered.