It’s a stunt, performative politics, a farce, a side show, a distraction from the HYEFU and quarterly GDP results being released this week… goodness me, the thought of a debate between our current Finance Minister, Nicola Willis, and a previous Finance Minister, Ruth Richardson, caused quite a stir this week, didn't it?  

Politics is, by its nature, a contest of ideas and values, so why are we afraid of a little debate? We see performative debate taking place in the House on a regular basis? Dare I say it - but with all the hype, maybe people will watch this one. 

I like that Finance Minister Nicola Willis isn’t quietly counting down the days until the Christmas break to slink away and hope the fudge campaign, devised by the Taxpayers Union, will slowly slip from our minds after a bevy and BBQ or three.  

In his column in the NZ Herald this week, Mathew Hooton said that whoever advised Finance Minister Nicola Willis to challenge her predecessor Ruth Richardson, now the chair of the Taxpayers Union, to a debate should be sacked. I wonder whether Willis, an experienced debater, came up with the idea herself.  

Hooton has a point - it’s potentially a lose-lose situation. Richardson is going to be cast as a member of the hard-nose right happy to inflict misery on people to achieve fiscal consolidation, and Willis could be a sitting duck depending on the HYEFU and quarterly GDP results released next week.  

But do we want politicians who are always thinking about themselves, take a strategic approach and craft their messaging to avoid transparency, or would you prefer a Finance Minister prepared to openly discuss one of the main issues concerning New Zealanders today - the state of the economy - with someone who is trying to undermine her?  

The NZ Herald’s political editor, Thomas Coughlan, does an excellent job of explaining what’s behind this situation in his article titled Ruth Richardson v Nicola Willis - the facts behind the argument.  

Essentially, after a financial crisis or shock it is accepted that Governments spend more to get through - and that the books end up in a bit of mess - but once the economy has ‘restarted’ and we’re on the other side of the shock, fiscal consolidation kicks in, and budgets tighten so the country is ready for the next financial shock.  

What is to be debated is whether the current coalition is moving fast enough when it comes to this fiscal consolidation. Will we be ready for the next financial shock? We know we have challenges ahead - with two of the known ones being our aging population’s impact on our health system and the increased cost of superannuation. Do we increase taxes? Reduce spending and inflict the social costs of austerity? Or do we risk taking a slower approach to getting back on track, with less negative impact on our communities?

As long as it’s a civil one - it sounds like something worth debating. But it needs to be a debate which doesn’t get personal, nasty or derogatory. One in which each debater expresses their values and the reasoning behind their approach, backs their thinking with evidence and outlays a long term vision for New Zealand. This is the kind of discourse we should be having. Let’s get an independent economist to run it - and get on with it.  

If nothing else - it could be highly entertaining, something we could all do with at this point in the year.  

LISTEN ABOVE

It’s a stunt, performative politics, a farce, a side show, a distraction from the HYEFU and quarterly GDP results being released this week… goodness me, the thought of a debate between our current Finance Minister, Nicola Willis, and a previous Finance Minister, Ruth Richardson, caused quite a stir this week, didn't it? &nbsp;
Politics is, by its nature, a contest of ideas and values, so why are we afraid of a little debate? We see performative debate taking place in the House on a regular basis? Dare I say it - but with all the hype, maybe people will watch this one.&nbsp;
I like that Finance Minister Nicola Willis isn’t quietly counting down the days until the Christmas break to slink away and hope the fudge campaign, devised by the Taxpayers Union, will slowly slip from our minds after a bevy and BBQ or three. &nbsp;
In his column in the NZ Herald this week, Mathew Hooton said that whoever advised Finance Minister Nicola Willis to challenge her predecessor Ruth Richardson, now the chair of the Taxpayers Union, to a debate should be sacked. I wonder whether Willis, an experienced debater, came up with the idea herself. &nbsp;
Hooton has a point - it’s potentially a lose-lose situation. Richardson is going to be cast as a member of the hard-nose right happy to inflict misery on people to achieve fiscal consolidation, and Willis could be a sitting duck depending on the HYEFU and quarterly GDP results released next week. &nbsp;
But do we want politicians who are always thinking about themselves, take a strategic approach and craft their messaging to avoid transparency, or would you prefer a Finance Minister prepared to openly discuss one of the main issues concerning New Zealanders today - the state of the economy - with someone who is trying to undermine her? &nbsp;
The NZ Herald’s political editor, Thomas Coughlan, does an excellent job of explaining what’s behind this situation in his article titled Ruth Richardson v Nicola Willis - the facts behind the argument. &nbsp;
Essentially, after a financial crisis or shock it is accepted that Governments spend more to get through - and that the books end up in a bit of mess - but once the economy has ‘restarted’ and we’re on the other side of the shock, fiscal consolidation kicks in, and budgets tighten so the country is ready for the next financial shock. &nbsp;
What is to be debated is whether the current coalition is moving fast enough when it comes to this fiscal consolidation. Will we be ready for the next financial shock? We know we have challenges ahead - with two of the known ones being our aging population’s impact on our health system and the increased cost of superannuation. Do we increase taxes? Reduce spending and inflict the social costs of austerity? Or do we risk taking a slower approach to getting back on track, with less negative impact on our communities?
As long as it’s a civil one - it sounds like something worth debating. But it needs to be a debate which doesn’t get personal, nasty or derogatory. One in which each debater expresses their values and the reasoning behind their approach, backs their thinking with evidence and outlays a long term vision for New Zealand. This is the kind of discourse we should be having. Let’s get an independent economist to run it - and get on with it. &nbsp;
If nothing else - it could be highly entertaining, something we could all do with at this point in the year. &nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE

News, opinion, analysis, lifestyle and entertainment – we’ve got your Sunday morning listening covered with The Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin on Newstalk ZB.

The Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin

Francesca Rudkin: Willis v Richardson, I'm all for it

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/5618dcc7-f0d2-4a28-9b53-b3b2015d33f0/transcript