Table of Contents
After Britain declared war on Germany in September 1939, there was an eight-month period in which there were a few brief skirmishes but very little significant fighting on land. The standoff in Western Europe was dubbed the “Phoney War”, the “Bore War” and the “sitzkrieg” (“the sitting war” – in contrast to the blitzkrieg inflicted on Poland).
Military action was mainly carried out at sea until Hitler’s lightning invasion of Norway in April 1940 sparked serious hostilities.
With New Zealand’s general election less than six months away, Labour and the coalition are engaged in their own Phoney War on account of Chris Hipkins’ refusal to announce more than a handful of policy pledges so far. His frustrating response to almost any question is to repeat the mantra, “Labour’s priorities are jobs, health, homes and the cost of living.”
The coalition parties appear to be raring for a bare-knuckle fight with Labour, but have ended up sniping at each other, instead, as they set out their own election policies.
This month the Labour Party sent out a skimpy newsletter outlining “What we have committed to so far.” The list was so short it read more like a middle finger to voters than a serious contribution to debate with an election fast approaching.
Hipkins promised a Capital Gains Tax levied on investment and business properties to finance three free doctors’ appointments a year for everyone; free cervical screening; and the vague “Good jobs with better pay – starting with the New Zealand Future Fund that will invest in the industries and regions that create opportunity.”
He has, of course, repeatedly vowed to repeal the government’s pay equity changes, although that promise didn’t make it into the newsletter. Nor did his promise to reinstate the ban on new oil and gas exploration permits.
Hipkins’ reluctance to grapple with the enemy hand-to-hand has certainly worked for Labour, which is riding high in the polls – and consistently higher than National. But by dragging his heels he risks making the party look as if it is having problems generating detailed policy rather than a cunning strategy to not interrupt the enemy while it is making mistakes. As a result, National, ACT and NZ First look dynamic while Labour appears becalmed.
This is showing up in recent polling. As David Farrar told Michael Laws on the Platform last week, Labour has “dropped three months in a row and Hipkins’ favourability dropped by seven points” in Taxpayers’ Union-Curia polls. Farrar said: “Their do-nothing, say-nothing [strategy] is starting to hurt them… They’ve pushed it too far.”
Hipkins has repeatedly asserted that he is biding his time until after the budget to announce details of Labour’s election platform – allegedly to ensure he won’t repeat the mistakes of 2017 by making promises that can’t be kept. The self-imposed deadline has bought him time, but he is going to have to front up promptly after the Bbdget is announced on May 28 or Labour will look like a party in policy disarray or simply unwilling to be honest about what it intends.
Voters will be keen to know, for instance, how much the promise to restore pay equity legislation will cost taxpayers. Treasury has estimated that $12.8 billion may have to be found – either by increased taxation or borrowing. Hipkins has so far been evasive on the topic.
They will undoubtedly also want to see the costings behind the free GP visits, and how dramatically property values will need to rise to finance them without making it just another impost on the already stretched public purse.
However, there is no need for Hipkins to wait for budget figures to tell the public where the party stands on highly flammable issues such as co-governance and race-based preference in health, education and other social services. They were contentious topics before the last election and are again in 2026 – although it’s a reasonable bet Hipkins won’t be any keener to talk about them than he was three years ago. In 2023, he tried to dampen criticism of Three Waters by damning it as “racist” and blamed hostility to co-governance on the grounds of it not having been explained clearly enough to voters.
Despite his reticence this election cycle, he has left a breadcrumb trail that gives an indication of his broad view of how he views the Crown’s relationship with iwi.
He has said, for instance, that Māori didn’t cede sovereignty when signing the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 and he has also indicated he would support further “checks and balances” to ensure legislation honours the Treaty.
An interview with Mihingarangi Forbes on RNZ’s MATA in February included an exchange about “partnership” – which, of course, during the last Labour government meant implementing co-governance in law and policy wherever it could.
When Forbes asked, “Is Labour still committed to the idea of partnership with Māori?”, Hipkins replied, “Absolutely. It is the only way forward… working together… mahi tahi.”
One of his Māori MPs, Cushla Tangaere-Manuel, was more frank at the Labour Party’s annual conference last December, forcing Hipkins into damage control.
The sitting member for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti – the only Māori electorate Labour won in 2023 – told the attendees: “The promise of Mana Motuhake Māori – Māori sovereignty… Aotearoa can achieve that with a Labour government.”
Newsroom reported that when Hipkins was asked after her speech whether establishing Māori sovereignty would be Labour policy, he said – presumably with a straight face – that his MP was talking about tino rangatiratanga or self-determination for everyone in New Zealand.
Suddenly, we are meant to believe that Labour’s Māori MPs are singing directly from David Seymour’s song-sheet. Yet it was obvious Tangaere-Manuel wasn’t recommending “self-determination” for all New Zealanders but rather promising Māori separatism.
The fact Hipkins tried to pretend otherwise is a reasonable indication of just how two-faced he will likely be with voters before the election on Māori-Crown relations.
However, there is an obvious problem looming with Labour’s determination to take all seven Māori seats. It will inevitably mean a public bidding war with Te Pāti Māori and the Greens. Hipkins is going to find it very difficult to present himself as a moderate to most New Zealanders while promising the earth to voters on the Māori roll.
Voters were given a preview of what that might mean when Labour’s Peeni Henare squared off against Te Pāti Māori’s Oriini Kaipara in the Tāmaki Makaurau by-election last September.
He promised $1 billion in funding for “Māori initiatives”, and the resurrection of both the Māori Health Authority and Hipkins’ compulsory “Aotearoa Histories” curriculum in schools that attributed Māori woes to colonisation.
However, despite Henare promising that Labour would resurrect the extravagant race-based policies of the Ardern-era, he was soundly trounced. So Hipkins will presumably have to promise much, much, more to try to win the seven seats – including bettering the pledge made by Tania Waikato, the Greens’ candidate for Waiariki, to transform the nation’s constitutional framework.
She wants Te Tiriti to become “the supreme constitutional law of Aotearoa”, alongside 1835’s He Whakaputanga (the Declaration of Independence).
In short, if Labour leads the next government, He Puapua will undoubtedly be back at full throttle – even though Hipkins will undoubtedly not mention it by name.
A version of this article was published on Point of Order.
