Let the fiscal games begin: Nicola Willis tries to lure Labour into truth or dare, the policy edition
Monday, 15 June 2026
ANALYSIS: And they’re off! Folks - we have our first fiscal hole of the election campaign. Well, sort of. Not quite. But it might become one!
Nicola Willis was first out the blocks with a “hidden bill”, what she describes as a sort of predecessor to a fiscal hole. It’ll turn into one if Labour can’t answer her questions.
Fiscal holes have become a mainstay of election campaigns since Steven Joyce dug a much lambasted $11.7 billion one in 2017.
They’re good fodder for attack ads, but often create a side argument to the benefits or otherwise of a policy - as National found out in the last campaign when it proposed tax cuts funded by, among other things, a foreign buyers tax which economists derided.
The difference is that the fiscal holes of elections past have largely been unveiled after the opposition parties produced something resembling a fiscal plan or alternative budget.
In this case, Willis has jumped in ahead and laid somewhat of a booby trap, trying to trick Labour into defending itself and revealing more detail about spending plans than they are not necessarily ready to make.
It’s basically a geeky game of political truth or dare. Truth: tell us the costings or dare: tell the public you can’t commit to some of the things you said.
Labour’s finance spokeswoman Barbara Edmonds has not taken the bait - for now. Asked to explain line by line her party’s position on the allegations Willis laid at her feet, she stuck to her guns. Later, she said, once they’ve drawn up a fully costed policy platform.
It’s worth remembering where we are in the electoral cycle. There are still just under 5 months until election day, and while election campaigns have gradually stretched to essentially year-long affairs, there is still a very long road ahead for Labour to release this level of detail.
In 2023, National waited until the end of August to release its costed tax plan - 45 days out from election day. And its full fiscal plan was delivered even later. It had been talking about tax cuts and its childcare subsidy well before it outlined how it would pay for the $14 billion package.
Giving Labour the same grace they afforded themselves would mean Labour has another three months to respond to the “yes or no” questions Nicola Willis has demanded answers to.
The question surrounding the pay equity scheme is perhaps the most pertinent. Changing the scheme lifted an $11 billion liability off the government’s books, and Willis is right to question how Labour will pay for its commitment to reinstate the policy.
Thus far, Labour has relied on casting doubt on the estimated costings of that scheme. It argues that advice about how the figure was reached has largely been redacted, and it wants more detail.
When Stuff asked Barbara Edmonds about this on Sunday, she said Labour remained committed to reinstating the law as it was previously written.
That leaves only two options: 1) they’re going to find $11 billion to put aside to pay for it or 2) they’ll cost it differently and say $11 billion is overstated.
The implication behind the second option though is not a swipe at the government, or the National Party - it’s a swipe at the credibility of the Treasury.
And there is a risk in downgrading the cost - the Labour Party messaging was that the government “mugged” women to pay for their budget. If Labour doesn’t promise to give it back in full, it could be accused of similar theft to a lesser extent.
It was somewhat mischievous of National to include the five top performing state- owned enterprises or mixed-ownership model companies as those Labour would swipe the dividends off to pump into its future fund - an investment fund for New Zealand businesses and infrastructure.
Labour has refused to confirm which companies’ or entities’ dividends would end up in the fund, citing commercial sensitivity, so has left itself wide open to speculation.
And while picking the top performing ones might be a little irksome to Labour (Edmonds went as far as calling it “reckless” as it could have a market impact on the companies the government has a major stake in), it perfectly illustrates the problem Labour has not explained away.
If dividends from those companies go into the fund, that leaves a hole in the consolidated fund which is used to pay for health, education, and police. The money has to come from somewhere. And Willis has just showcased how big of a problem that could be for them - a $2.78 billion dollar problem.
While the timing from Willis is a little puzzling - usually this would happen much later in the campaign - the way the polls are, National will be keen to seize every opportunity to cast doubt about Labour’s plan.
National will be frustrated that Labour has managed a lead in the polls without really lifting a finger.
Labour has criticised National but has released next to no policy, content to watch voters drift its way while the Government struggles.
This 'small target' strategy has left little for National to criticise the main opposition party for. So, National has painted its own target, daring Labour to tell New Zealanders why it's incorrect, and trying to draw them into a contest.
Especially because this is an election in which big spending promises should be met with a higher level of scrutiny given the state of the books.
Willis is just getting a headstart on what is sure to be a heavy feature of this year’s campaign.
She’ll be hoping being quick off the starting mark with the assumptions she’s made doesn’t leave her with a bigger problem to explain away later in the race.
After all truth or dare is never a risk free game.