The PM is right, we have a ‘culture of saying no’ and we need to shake it off – Liam Dann

• The Prime Minister has criticised a “culture of saying no” hindering economic growth.
• He emphasised the need for foreign investment and commercialising science and technology.
• His speech used Taylor Swift’s snub of New Zealand as an analogy.

The Prime Minister has taken aim at “a culture of saying no”, which he believes is holding back our economic growth prospects.

The country needs more “can do” and less “can don’t” ... or something like that.

Specifically, Christopher Luxon argued that we need to make New Zealand the kind of country that Taylor Swift visits again.

Swift played in New Zealand on tours in 2012, 2013 and 2018.

Then she got too big to play anywhere except Eden Park.

But she couldn’t get a spot there last year because the woke, urban elite led by spiritual figurehead Helen Clark said “no”.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon argues that we need to make New Zealand the kind of country that Taylor Swift visits again. Photo / Getty Images

I don’t know if that’s strictly true but it was the implication and Clark took the bait, responding with a typically measured comment about the virtues of careful planning rules.

Grabbing headlines with this angle was a strategically bold approach from the PM in what was billed as an economy-focused State of the Nation address this week.

The debate inevitably overshadowed the specifics of the Government’s actual policy announcements – which were aimed at encouraging more foreign direct investment and giving Government investment in science and technology a more commercial edge.

And, of course, it immediately opened up the PM to mockery.

I wasn’t going to indulge. No, I thought, this is serious stuff. Then I took the PM’s speech to heart. Yes, I thought, if a joke is there for the making, let’s make it.

But ultimately, and despite my unfortunate habit of elevating satire above substance, I think the PM is right.

It was politically astute (assuming the PM and his advisers were aware of the inevitable reaction it would provoke).

If politicians have learned anything from the Trump era, it’s that leaning into the mockery is the best approach.

Attempts to avoid it by being cautious and stage-managed invariable fail and suffer from burying the key message with PR-scripted platitudes.

That’s been a problem for the PM in the first year of his term.

Last week he served up the opportunity for satire on a plate but, in doing so, delivered a message that will resonate with many Kiwis across the political spectrum.

If nothing else, he got Taylor Swift in the headline, which grabbed attention in much the same way as this column is shamelessly attempting to do.

The Prime Minister is right that New Zealand needs to start doing stuff. We’re going backwards, we need to start moving with some urgency to create more wealth.

There is a truth underlying the Taylor Swift analogy.

New Zealand made a big choice in 2020 in saying no to Covid. I still think it was the right choice and saved lives.

Others disagree. But regardless, as we hunkered down to survive the pandemic, we collectively adopted a very defensive mindset.

To quote a piece of Swiftian philosophy, we need to shake it off.

We do need to encourage more foreign direct investment and we do need to sharpen the focus of the science and technology sector to develop more commercial opportunities.

Whether the actual policies announced can achieve this is another matter.

Effectively amounting to a revamp of how the Government administers and markets its efforts to achieve these goals, they were light on substance.

My issue with the State of the Nation speech wasn’t the Taylor Swift angle.

It was that the two other examples the PM used to illustrate his point were the economies of Singapore and Ireland.

He argues we should emulate the way those two nations have respectively commercialised their scientific research and attracted foreign investment.

Again, I agree with the sentiment.

But in those examples, the Government is missing two very big pieces of the puzzle.

Singapore is richer than us because it has a compulsory savings scheme and it reinvests that money into highly productive domestic (and international) companies via a hugely capitalised state investment firm.

Ireland attracts more foreign direct investment because it has a low tax regime that makes it more attractive to multinational companies than rival nations in the region.

If the Government was really saying “yes” to emulating the success of Ireland and Singapore, shouldn’t its announcements have been locally tailored variations on these policies?

That would be bold and transformational.

I’m no fan of Donald Trump but (as Herald columnist Matthew Hooton has also pointed out) a big part of his appeal is his commitment to just doing stuff in the face of what feels like a culture of political inertia.

No mucking around.

KiwiSaver to be compulsory as of next Thursday and KiwiSaver funds to get tax incentives to invest domestically in technology and infrastructure.

And from April 1, new low taxes for international corporations prepared to invest in New Zealand, based on the number of skilled jobs created.

Okay, I’m not sure about the finer details - I just made up those examples on the spot – but you get the picture.

This Government has had a year already.

Of course, I’m not so naive that I can’t see why this is not an option for the PM - even if he is quietly sympathetic to the ideas.

For starters, MMP has him squeezed between two ideologically opposed parties.

Act won’t have a bar of compulsory savings. David Seymour told me last year that he doesn’t even like KiwiSaver.

NZ First is no fan of selling stuff to foreigners – which is what overseas investment often means.

I expect the PM has had to draw on every bit of political capital he has with Winston Peters to get him across the line on less dramatic foreign investment rules changes that many expect to see announced in the coming weeks.

Secondly, we’re broke.

Any tax policy that hits the Government’s short-term revenue, or saving policy that hits households in the pocket, would be both economically and politically risky right now.

Cultural change and operational restructuring are cheaper and push in the right direction.

The Government is in a tight spot but, if it can at least grease the wheels of this economic cycle (touch wood), it might find itself better placed for the transformational stuff in time.

The PM started with Swift so I’ll finish with Swift. Jonathan this time:

“If a lump of soot falls into the soup and you cannot conveniently get it out, scum it well, and it will give the soup a high French taste.”

Liam Dann is business editor-at-large for the New Zealand Herald. He is a senior writer and columnist, and also presents and produces videos and podcasts. He joined the Herald in 2003.