Why it’s been a rough week for Chris Bishop and National
Sunday, 22 February 2026
Vernon Small is a former journalist and ex Labour Government advisor
OPINION: It's still nine months away, but the gravitational pull of the election is already having a profound impact on the Government’s policies and coalition politics.
Falling out of orbit or put on slow rotation in just the last few days were the referendum on a four-year parliamentary term, the requirement for space to allow two million houses to be built in Auckland, the promised ban on paywave surcharges and Wellington's second Mount Victoria Tunnel.
Even the plan for an LNG import terminal – announced only last week to limited support and howls of disapproval ‒ has had shade cast on it by Act leader David Seymour.
But in a week that has buffeted National in particular, senior minister ‒ and leadership aspirant ‒ Chris Bishop has been the one feeling gravity the most.
Read more:
This week’s excellent Infrastructure Commission report, looking out into the economic space 30 years from now, was just one of his problems.
It highlighted the need to wind back shiny big (read: “political pork barrel”) megaprojects in favour of maintenance and smaller developments and was particularly rough on transport, one of Bishop’s portfolios which boasts the costly Roads of National Significance (archly dubbed Roads of National Party Significance by Green co-leader Chloe Swarbrick).
The report said we needed to “think slow and act fast” when planning new investments, prioritising low-cost incremental upgrades over expensive fully-formed solutions – especially in health and transport – where mega projects threaten to crowd out essential maintenance and renewals. With 11,926 projects worth $275 billion in the pipeline, we have far more on our plate than our economy can deliver. Smaller projects worth less than $100 million are 99% of the number in the pipeline. A handful of unfunded megaprojects account for the largest share of the total
The driving force in the future, as the commission signalled in its draft report past year, should be demographics and economic changes. An ageing population should require relatively less spending on education and transport, for instance, and greater spending on health and hospitals. Our response to climate change and the need for greater electrification indicates less emphasis on roads and more on public transport and power infrastructure.
Between 2010 and 2022 capital investment in land transport represented 1.3% of GDP, which the commission sees falling to 1% over the 30 years from 2024. Hospitals’ share should double from 0.2% to 0.4%. The only other sector needing a sizeable boost, in the commission’s “forward guidance”, was electricity and gas infrastructure, up from 0.8% to 1.3% of GDP.
With a strong public appetite for a bipartisan approach to infrastructure (and to avoid the costly flip-flops on projects when governments change) planning through an agreed “demographic” lens is an appealing approach.
In an ideal world, perhaps in a parallel universe, it would see politicians agree on broad priorities that our economy and population make-up require – reflected in allocations on a percentage of GDP basis – and a protocol on dealing with existing contracts. At the same time, it would give political parties room to campaign on projects within that allocation, based on their policies and ideologies – an essential element of democracy ‒ while keeping the infrastructure spending pointing in the right direction.
Meanwhile back on Planet New Zealand Minister Bishop was extending the timeframe for the second Mount Victoria tunnel – perhaps in response to the tone of the commission’s report – while finessing the issue of tolls to fund a new Auckland harbour bridge – another matter raised (unhelpfully for Bishop) by the commission.
He was also bending to the pressure from Auckland, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, his caucus colleagues and political polling, by winding back the housing capacity Auckland must plan for from 2 million to 1.6 million homes.
Even then, he does not seem to have lanced the boil completely. Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour has indicated a rethink may be possible, Auckland’s mayor Wayne Brown and councillors are baulking at Cabinet’s role in the final decision and some in Auckland oppose even the lower 1.6 million figure, which is still a 400,000 increase on the 1.2 million in Auckland’s existing unitary plan.
The next problem drifting in to Bishop’s view is whether to refer to a fast-track panel a private sector application to develop the Lake Onslow pumped hydro scheme – a project rubbished by National but now revived by a high-profile group including the Reserve Bank chairman Rodger Finlay, electricity industry heavyweight Keith Turner and Bishop’s former political rival in the resource management arena, David Parker.
If it does get the go-ahead from him, and then the panel, it could long-term provide the “firming” and dry year insurance that the LNG terminal aims to provide; a project that will be given consent under special legislation without being tested through even the fast-track process.
And then there was this week’s The Post-Freshwater Strategy poll numbers that showed a narrow 61-59 victory to the left. In line with other polls, it shows a very tight race, but with a small Te Pāti Māori overhang the left majority would grow to perhaps four seats.
The big drop in National’s support since the election, and the meteoric fall in the public’s trust in its ability to manage the cost-of-living crisis, are masked by the growth in NZ First support and the fact that the coalition collectively is keeping its head just above water. But National will be hoping the Reserve Bank’s forecasts – which foresee greater growth, but limited chances of a rate rise before the election – will boost its fortunes as the year rolls by.
Meanwhile, speculation Bishop could be evicted from Parliament if he lost his electorate seat, and National failed to win many or any list seats, is probably over-wrought.
It is unclear how many of its 37 seats – on The Post’s poll numbers – would be list ones and therefore how safe Bishop and National’s senior list-only MPs Nicola Willis, Gerry Brownlee and Paul Goldsmith, would be.
You would have to say fairly safe, because if it polled around 30% National would likely shed a fair number of electorates, opening up list places.
That may be cold comfort to Bishop though, for what has been a rough week for National’s hardest working minister.
What do you think? Email sundayletters@stuff.co.nz. Please include your full name and address.