Simon Bridges is worried about your back pocket.
He mentioned it at least five times in his speech launching National's economic plan today.
He's also worried about the back pocket of a new mum in Kawerau and a construction company boss in Hawke's Bay.
In a speech that was light on policy detail, the constant reference to the pockets of "ordinary Kiwis" suggests Bridges plans to keep it simple for voters this year.
"We're the National Party and our values haven't changed," he said later when asked what was new in this announcement.
To some degree it was "picking up where we left off" in 2017, Bridges conceded.
"I'm not trying to suggest to that it's a lot different, " he said. "These are certainly my personal priorities, they are the priorities of the National Party."
• Simon Bridges announces teaser in National's economic goals
• National Leader Simon Bridges has accused the Government of 'screwing up the economy'
• National leader Simon Bridges signals superannuation move in economic policy
• Premium - Growth versus growth - the problems with arguments about statistics
The structure of the tax package might be a bit different to the Steven Joyce model he said, without giving any more clues into how that would work.
Infrastructure would likely be a bit more ambitious than it was under the last National Government.
Exactly how National will cut taxes, build all the infrastructure and keep the Crown accounts in surplus wasn't fully explained.
One specific answer was that National would use the public private partnership model (PPPs) to get things built - a policy that saves governments money but can mean a user pays and tolls (presumably coming out of someone's back pocket).
Beyond that, Bridges seems to be keeping the faith in the core National view that boosting business performance translates to a wealthier nation and eventually higher tax takes.
Employment laws would be repealed, 90-day trials for workers will be back.
So lower tax, less regulation and a "back to basics" message on the economy.
Up against a Government which is tackling so many complex policy initiatives that it sometimes struggles to offer clear vision, it's not hard to see the political logic.
Some measurable goals included getting GDP back to at least 3 per cent per annum, getting GDP per capita back into the top half of the OECD table, reducing the after-tax income gap with Australia and reviving business confidence.
They might be unfashionable right now, but Bridges wants the focus back on the old-school economic numbers.
"They're not just numbers," Bridges said. "They are not just statistics, they matter every bit as much to the child growing up in Kawerau as they do to the wealthy person in Herne Bay."
"People say we've moved on from GDP and talk about wellbeing and so forth. We've heard all that talk from the Government," he said. "It is just talk."
Bridges attacked a lack of vision he clearly sees in Labour party values.
He twice referred to Norman Kirk, paraphrasing the late, great Labour Prime Minister's comment that New Zealanders didn't ask for much: somewhere to live, someone to love, a job and a bit of hope.
"That's fundamentally true," he said. "But I want a lot more than that for [my son] I want him to be a world beater. We can set our sights higher than just that base-line. But that requires a stronger economy."
Those looking to the right of the political spectrum for a more radical approach to boosting New Zealand's low productivity rate and transforming the economy may be left a little disappointed.
National under Bridges is not going to be a party of radical reform, any more than it was under John Key or Bill English.
He and his team are betting big that New Zealanders want a narrower focus not a more expansive one.
Finance Minister Grant Robertson has already hit back:
"New Zealanders have moved on," he said.
"The very first question he faced from the audience was about climate change. The fact that Simon Bridges didn't talk about climate change during a major speech on the economy was deafening.
"It was quite clear today that National has no new ideas."
Perhaps that's true, but what's not so clear is if the majority of voters have given up on some of those old ideas. Certainly for many in the business community they will still strike the right chord.
What it does mean is that, with polls pointing to a tightly fought election, voters will at least be offered a clear choice about the style of Government they want ... even if the substance isn't so radically different.