Anyone want to buy a hole? This week the National Party smashed the emergency glass, tripped the alarm, and pointed, screaming, at a gaping void. There was an $11.7 billion hole in the Labour Party's fiscal numbers, said Steven Joyce, and they weren't fit to govern. The only question, he charged, was whether it was a balls-up or a swindle.
There is no hole, retorted Labour. There is a hole, hollered National. No hole! Hole! And on it went for several hours on Monday, before the economists gathered to peer into the abyss. One by one, these experts in the matter of holes shook their heads and pronounced that for all the road cones, flashing lights and hazard tape, there wasn't in fact a hole. The emperor had no spreadsheet. Wincingly, when asked yesterday to cite so much as a single individual who supported his central claim of an $11.7 billion lapse in Labour's accounting, National's finance spokesperson failed to name one. Except Bill English, that is.
Joyce insists that he does have some expert support, pointing to commentary suggesting Labour's plan left it with an emaciated operating allowance, in which most of the money was ear-marked for health and education. Opinions differ on that point, and there are clear grounds for criticism and questions. Opinions do not differ, however, on the central assertion levelled by Joyce. It isn't true. The only question is whether it was a balls-up or a swindle.
He could, of course, have summoned the press and expressed grave fears about Labour's numbers, about the approach they'd adopted, and about the leeway for future spending. But Joyce, the most effective campaign strategist of the last decade in New Zealand, would have known very well that such a statement would sink. To suck up the media oxygen, and therefore skew the imminent debate towards questions of financial competence, to stir up another "show me the money" moment, it needed to be big.
That the central claim has been shot down pretty much unanimously should be the end of it. But, slightly terrifyingly, maybe not. This is the world of illusory truth effect, in which veracity bends. As a paper in the Europe Journal of Psychology puts it, research shows that "repeating false claims will not only increase their believability but may also result in the false belief that they had been heard about previously and from more than one source". Fiscal hole is the Mr Snuffleupagus to Joyce's Big Bird - the imaginary friend that got talked about so much he became real.