Analysis: Some may say Prime Minister Chris Hipkins' capital gains and wealth tax rule-out is cynical, but there's another word you could use: practical.
It's true that for some, the ideal of politics is that politicians express their beliefs, and voters choose their allegiances based on how closely the politicians' beliefs align with their own.
Voters might then, in that perfect world, expect politicians to hold true at every turn, in the face of every kind of strife, to those beliefs.
But politics is not perfect. It's a scrap, full of compromises. Two steps forward, one step back. You can’t change anything if you’re not voted back in.
Chris Hipkins - who believes in a capital gains tax - is likely hoping this one step back will help him get one step ahead of National in this neck-and-neck election.
Labour seems nervous. So it should be, after a series of ministerial mishaps and scandals that have plagued and distracted the Government for four months. It started with Stuart Nash. Then Meka Whaitiri. Michael Wood. Kiri Allan. Jan Tinetti. A firing, a defection, a resignation. It's hard to keep track of.
None of those issues were on Chris Hipkins' "bread and butter" menu, and he wants to - needs to - clear the table.
Hipkins acknowledged that today, saying he realised the Government had been "a bit messy" for a "few months" and he'd been in politics long enough to know the direct line between distractions like those and voters' disaffection.
Hipkins' announcement today he would rule out a capital gains and wealth tax under his leadership also follows a Talbot Mills poll which gave Labour its lowest result since 2019, on 31% for the party vote - five points below the National Party on 36%.
The teeth are chattering, but tension is coming from the blue corner too - and now Labour has quelled part of one of National's main attack lines (count how many times you hear / read "you can't trust Labour on tax" between now and October 14th).
National Party leader Christopher Luxon said Labour had been working on the taxes behind the scenes but had now "cynically tried to rule them out to protect their position in the polls".
I mean - yes. Exactly. Labour wants to win, just as National does. And Labour knows to do that it needs to secure the centre vote - Hipkins has never been backwards in coming forwards that that is what he is gunning for.
And the centre is Hipkins' strength, he is a centre-left politician. He has demonstrated repeatedly (particularly in his policy purge earlier in the year) he will always favour political practicality over any ideological whimsy. The latter can keep for times of economic strength.
Luxon may call it cynicism, but Hipkins was being practical, just as Luxon was when he said on 1News' programme Q+A he would resign should access to abortion become more restricted under his leadership. Women's rights and Luxon's purported conservatism is one of Labour's attack lines. Luxon moved to shut it down.
That's the game.
Green Party co-leader James Shaw had a brief but ultimately feeble stab at Hipkins' political principles, saying what is the point of power if not to use it. He said that in a statement - in a press conference later, he was softer, saying he was "disappointed", a word about as descriptive as "interesting".
That's true, but fair enough too: what is the point of power if you can't secure and maintain it?
And how about: what's the point of being the Green Party if you're not going to clearly, strongly and unapologetically tear Labour to pieces for failing to deliver a capital gains tax Labour's leader believes in?
The Greens can't have a timid go at Labour for not being principled when it's failing to live up to its own kaupapa and be strident in its own principles. Voters would be unlikely to see David Seymour pull any punches with Luxon over tax cuts.
The Green Party's message is: if you want a progressive and truly left Labour Government: vote Green. But if James Shaw can't tear shreds off Chris Hipkins in a press conference, how strong can he argue around a coalition negotiation table?
You can't have bread and butter if all you have is margarine.
SHARE ME