KEY POINTS:
National leader John Key didn't directly use the term "sandwich economy" in the opening salvo of his unofficial election campaign.
The speech was notable for his move to set the agenda by stipulating the "questions" (not policies - that comes later) that this year's election will be fought
on.
But the National leader should coin the term next time he paints the picture of a New Zealand "sandwiched between low growth and high inflation" where finance company collapses have robbed thousands of their savings, mortgage rates are sky-rocketing, retirement savings are being eroded by falling share prices and inflation is eating away at spending power and living standards.
He could also expand the analogy further and question whether this situation is not in part because Finance Minister Michael Cullen has been "eating tax-payers' lunches" by expropriating their incomes through excess taxes.
Right now "sandwich economy" is apt enough for the situation that New Zealanders, from policy-makers through to business and householders, are facing.
A situation that is a complete about-face from the Goldilocks economy (not too hot, not too cold) that under-pinned New Zealand's economic fortunes for a substantial period in the Helen Clark Government reign.
Trouble is finding a solution to the sandwich economy may turn out to be more difficult than Goldilocks' feat in keeping the three bears at bay.
Astute readers of both Key's speech and Cullen's recent op-ed commentary on the economy will note that neither Labour nor National appear to have ready answers to deal with this stage of the boom-bust cycle.
But if National tackles the economic challenges facing New Zealand with the "roll your sleeves" up approach Key foreshadowed yesterday - by pledging to send youth offenders to military-style training "boot camps" coupled with incentives to keep 16- to 17-year-old school leavers in training rather than milking welfare benefits - he may well find plenty of New Zealanders agree with his "time for a fresh start" mantra.
National's approach will be a pragmatic one, says its finance spokesman Bill English.
But right now the party is keeping its powder dry on the economic front until the international turmoil which has roiled stock-markets diminishes and the situation crystallises.
Key's agenda-setting questions are these:
* Why, after eight years of Labour, are we paying the second-highest interest rates in the developed world?
* Why, under Labour, is the gap between our wages, and wages in Australia and other parts of the world, getting bigger and bigger?
* Why, under Labour, do we only get a tax cut in election year, when we really needed it years ago?
* Why are grocery and petrol prices going through the roof?
* Why can't our hardworking kids afford to buy their own house?
* Why is one in five Kiwi kids leaving school with grossly inadequate literacy and numeracy skills?
* Why, when Labour claims it aspires to be carbon-neutral, do our greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at an alarming rate?
* Why hasn't the health system improved when billions of extra dollars have been poured into it?
* Why is violent crime against innocent New Zealanders continuing to soar and why is Labour unable to do anything about it?
Forget the poor grammar (Key's speech-writers should lift their game here). The important issue is whether National - which no doubt has been helped on this by focus polling - has accurately defined the questions that are resonating with New Zealanders.
If Key has not followed the political axiom "don't pose questions that you don't have the answers to" he could quickly be undone by an acute interviewer or political opponent.
In any event, having defined the questions, Key is honour-bound to clearly state before the election takes place just what National's answers will be.
Yesterday Labour accused Key of wrapping its youth policies in "blue ribbon". There's an element of truth to Cabinet Minister Annette King's claim. But given the "tit for tat" approach Labour has used by lifting some of National's good ideas, Key's move is hardly surprising.
It will not escape notice on the Beehive's ninth floor that he has also undermined Clark's pledge of "relentless" positivism by stating National will be "unrelenting" in its quest to lift New Zealand's economic growth rate and raise interest rates.
Labour once stated an ambition to get New Zealand back into the top half of the OECD on GDP per capita income basis.
But it let the ambition slide.
Right now Key and English say National has an "economic plan" to build foundations for a better future.
This is couched in terms of lifting medium-term economic performance and managing taxpayers' money more effectively - a regular programme of ongoing tax cuts, more infrastructure investment to underpin productivity growth, more care with the public purse, a determination to equip young New Zealanders with an education to cope well in a 21st global economy, reductions in compliance and bureaucracy and "saying goodbye" to blind ideology that locks the private sector out of too many parts of the economy.
English says National's plan will not be a rerun of the empty slogans and rhetoric that he claims coloured the knowledge economy focus in Labour's early years in Government.
That said, the business community will want to see some evidence that National's "plan" is accompanied by the action points and clear timelines that Labour was reluctant to sign up to when it unveiled its own innovation programmes.
Yesterday's policy announcement was focused on addressing the burning social issue of lost youth.
But National also needs to look at the burning issues affecting the demographics that form its own voting catchment.
It could start by addressing the "sandwich generation" - those responsible New Zealand parents whose ability to save for their retirement is hindered because they are "sandwiched" between the needs of their young adult children and their own parents.
The same "sandwich generation" that is helping to fund their children's university educations and helping them save for deposits on houses by allowing them to live on at home.
The "sandwich generation" that helps ageing parents to cope with high living costs because their incomes have been eroded through poor investments or simply bad timing.
This "sandwich" generation does not receive Government help with Working for Families programmes.
But addressing the realities National's voting base faces is also critical to New Zealand's future success.
On the business front, firms will be looking to National to engender a sense of confidence in its ability to lead a purposeful Government.
Yesterday's effort was good enough - but it will need to put a lot more on the table (and quickly) if the ambitious are to be persuaded that New Zealand will get on to an upward swing next year.