The Evidence Gap: When governance loses sight of reality

Video: A clip narrated by Samuel Hudson analysing recovery claims in PM Christopher Luxon’s State of the Nation speech amid a growing disconnect between official government messaging and lived economic reality. (Supplied / thisquality / Quiet Pact Network)

A recovery is being claimed by the government. The evidence offered is confidence surveys and promised forecasts. What is missing is proof that ordinary households are meaningfully better off.

In Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s State of the Nation speech, recovery is framed as having arrived. Inflation is said to be down. Business confidence is up. These signals are presented as evidence that progress is underway and that the country is moving forward. But within the speech itself, there is no evidence that real disposable incomes have meaningfully improved.

Advertisement
    
    This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.
  
    Advertisement
    Why this ad?
      
        Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

Leading indicators describe sentiment and activity. Confidence does not pay rent. Forecasts do not reduce grocery bills. Economic indicators may suggest momentum, but they do not demonstrate that households are experiencing relief.

The speech repeatedly relies on macro-economic indicators to support its claims, while offering no clear account of how wages have kept pace with costs or how economic affordability has improved. There is no discussion of whether families are financially better off month to month.

Image: Prime Minister Christopher Luxon delivers his State of the Nation speech, where recovery is framed as having arrived despite limited evidence that households are materially better off. (Supplied / thisquality / Quiet Pact Network / New Zealand National Party)

At one point, the Prime Minister acknowledges that the recovery “took so long to get traction” and that the period has been “challenging” for families. That admission is notable because it recognises delay and difficulty. But the speech then quickly moves on without addressing whether households are still behind, or how much cumulative cost-of-living damage has been absorbed. There is no discussion of who bore that cost, or whether it has been recovered.

Advertisement
    
    This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.
  
    Advertisement
    Why this ad?
      
        Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

Long-term projections are presented as proof of progress while retirement balances, decades away, are cited as a major promise of something to look forward too for today. The benefits of these changes are framed as inevitable but future gains do not address present pressure. They do not resolve whether households can afford groceries, rent, or have a savings. This creates a gap between the recovery narrative and lived economic reality.

Luxon concedes that people still need to “feel it in their personal lives” and that this is something expected to come before the 2026 election. That statement undercuts the certainty of earlier claims he made. So, if improvement is still something people are waiting to feel, then it has not yet arrived for many.

A recovery measured primarily through confidence and forecasts tells you little about lived conditions. Until incomes rise faster than costs, claims of progress remain theoretical.

The evidence gap is about proof that the agenda offers optimism and reassurance, but it does not demonstrate that households are materially better off. It does not account for cumulative cost-of-living pressure or lingering household insecurity.

Recovery, if it is real, should be visible in pay packets, housing costs, and household stability. Until that evidence is shown, the recovery remains a manufactured narrative to change people’s perspectives, not a lived reality experienced across households.

Support Brief Banner

Keep independent journalism going.

We are independent and committed to bringing authentic reporting to the people.

thisquality is built for the people and powered by their support. People like you reading this free article help us remain a strong and independent platform within New Zealand's media landscape.

Advertisement
    
    This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.
  
    Advertisement
    Why this ad?
      
        Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

I'd like to donate

About thisquality

Advertisement

Advertisement Why this ad? Advertising revenue keeps articles from thisquality free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉