If we are to properly fund new projects like the Waterview Tunnel, we may need to change our attitude to national debt. Photo / Nick Reed
Opinion by Liam Dann
Liam Dann, Business Editor at Large for New Zealand’s Herald, works as a writer, columnist, radio commentator and as a presenter and producer of videos and podcasts.
Wow. We are collectively in debt to the tune of $230 trillion.
Not you or me specifically - nor New Zealanders or millennials or baby boomers.
That's the total of how much debt we, humans of Earth, have racked up, according to an International Monetary Fund report released last week.
Whom do we owe? The Martians?
The IMF reported the low interest rate policies since the GFC caused debt to spike to 225 per cent world GDP in 2016. That surpasses the previous record reached in 2009.
He borrowed pridently to cover the cost of the Christchurch Earthquakes then went into overdrive paying it down as a percentage of GDP.
English was aiming to get core net crown debt to 20 per cent of GDP by 2020.
I have asked him about his hard line attitude to debt and spending.
He makes a strong case for New Zealand's vulnerability as a small economy with high levels of private debt – one historically vulnerable to geo-political and geological shocks.
He genuinely believes we must be ready for the next shock.
His defensive stance struck a chord with many New Zealanders - particularly those old enough to remember our financial woes in the late 1970s and 1980s.
Distrust of public debt is so ingrained Labour and the Greens felt compelled to sign up to a fiscal responsibility policy that only slightly loosens the focus on debt repayment.
Vagaries of MMP politics aside, it may well have helped get them into power.
The Government is targeting a debt to GDP ratio of 20 per cent within five years of taking office.
But with demands mounting for new spending on infrastructure some economists are starting to wonder why we continue to take such an austere approach.
In a report released on Monday ANZ chief economist Sharon Zollner makes the point there is "nothing sacrosanct about the essentially arbitrary round figure target".
She argues we have been underspending and now need to urgently invest in housing, transport, education and health. She suggests the most fiscally responsible approach would be to further loosen the debt-to-GDP target.
New Zealanders - particularly on the right of the political spectrum - tend to assume governments are like bad business people, prone to poor investments.
It's not clear to me that this is true.
There was some poor fiscal management for several years under Robert Muldoon's National Government. The country was almost broke by 1984.
But across the scope of our history - and compared to many other countries - New Zealand's track record doesn't look so bad.
It seems like several generations of voters have been scarred by the legacy of the Muldoon years - and the pain of the austerity that followed.
We sweat over small-scale, anecdotal wastes of taxpayer money and forget even Muldoon's once derided Think Big programme paid off over time.