Heading back to the Brackenridge retreat in Martinborough, for Labour’s annual caucus retreat, and the very place where Ardern once made those remarks, Hipkins put asmall bit of distance between himself and his immediate predecessor by declining to give the year a snappy title.
“That didn’t always pan out for us,” he told media with a chuckle.
A lot both has and has not panned out for Labour since the party last gathered at Brackenridge for its caucus retreat. That was in 2020, when Ardern and Health Minister David Clark answered their first questions on something called coronavirus in a stand-up alongside a bouncy castle.
That was the good bit, when things, against all odds, very much did pan out for Labour. Covid swelled the caucus to the point Brackenridge could no longer accommodate them. The party went on the road, picking new locations each year, ending in Napier, where Ardern announced she would call it quits, a moment that was unexpectedly the least chaotic of what Ardern might have dubbed the “year of resignations (and one sacking)”.
Hipkins is happy to let it be known that he gets it, his party lost, and it needs to rethink its offering if it’s to stand a chance at turning the coalition into the first one-term government since 1975.
New Zealand “voted for change”, he said.
But just what “it” is, isn’t clear. Hipkins is far from the first opposition leader to take their time when it comes to putting up new policy. In fact, it’s fairly common, but that doesn’t make it any easier to answer one of the top questions voters tend to have of oppositions: if the Government sucks so much, what would you do differently?
Labour has kicked up a stink, with patchy data, over the reinstatement of interest deductions for residential landlords, but Hipkins wouldn’t today say whether a future Labour Government would undo the coalition’s changes; he hasn’t got a position on capital gains tax, wealth tax, or even whether Labour will vote for Te Pāti Māori’s member’s bill to take GST off all kai (a strikingly similar policy to Labour’s 2023 GST pledge).
Hipkins did say he wants to make sure the party is “ready” to form a government following the next election, and that this would mean “new ideas” and a “plan for the future .. and for New Zealanders to understand what that vision for the future is and what they can do to be part of it”.
Sausage rolls at Labour's caucus retreat in Brackenridge. Photo / Thomas Coughlan
A hint perhaps that he gets the criticism of the last Labour Government that it was unprepared for office, having not done enough policy work in opposition.
Hipkins said the next steps for Labour would come in two speeches he has scheduled for the coming weeks, about Labour’s values and vision for the future. The speeches are a good idea. Set-piece events are one of the few ways an opposition leader can insert themselves into the national conversation.
The test will be whether either speech contains any veritably new ideas. When asked about them, Hipkins conceded the values speech will mainly restate Labour’s existing values because these tend not to change.
But when asked about the forward-looking speech, Hipkins talked about the “future of work” research Labour had done last time it was in opposition, when Grant Robertson chaired a two-year commission that published a report on the future of work in 2016.
“We need to adapt and evolve for the gig economy ... We started this conversation with the Future of Work when we were last in opposition and we’ll continue it now,” Hipkins said.
All very true, but it’s not exactly a new idea. In fact, the main idea to emerge from that process was the social unemployment insurance scheme, which Hipkins himself played a part in killing when he assumed the Labour leadership last year.
It’s not all bad news. Hipkins has hit upon an interesting dilemma for the Government, recognising that New Zealanders voted for change last election, but questioning whether things like the rollback of smokefree policy, upping the culture war, and pivot on climate policy is really what they voted for. It’s perhaps a good question to probe, particularly as the Government’s fetish for urgency suggests it is itself not too keen to allow the public room to question its mandate either.
The only other ray of sunshine — and this could change — is that there isn’t yet (not yet, mind), the smell of a coup in the air. The caucus and the party are quite openly agonising about a future policy, and some MPs are pretty frank about what’s likely to be on the table: a wealth tax or a capital gains tax.
Whichever one (or neither) that the party eventually goes with is bound to ruffle feathers on one side or the other — whether Hipkins can survive this is a question for the future.
No wonder he’s putting it off.
Thomas Coughlan is Deputy Political Editor and covers politics from Parliament. He has worked for the Herald since 2021 and has worked in the press gallery since 2018.
