Resistance to the social bonds pilot has essentially boxed Labour and the Greens into a corner. Social bonds (or Social Impact Bonds as they are known internationally), after all, have traditionally been introduced by left-wing governments.

I understand that the role of the Opposition is to oppose. And there is potentially much to oppose in the execution of social bonds. But opposing social bonds in principle leaves fewer options for addressing entrenched social problems.

For those who have forgotten, social bonds are an innovative way of funding and delivering social services. Last week, Finance Minister Steven Joyce announced that New Zealand’s first social bond is now operational.

So what are opponents complaining about?

Opponents worry that the first social bond is providing employment services for those suffering mental illnesses, and that the government is ‘experimenting’ on a vulnerable group.

But participation is voluntary, which means opponents probably haven’t considered that some people suffering mental illnesses might actually want these services for themselves.

Especially when those services will be tailored, based on long-term outcomes, and designed to meet their unique circumstances.

Mental health might be a sensitive area, but it is also one where the government has admitted it has under-performed. Is it really so terrible that the government is trying to find better ways of doing things, while still being prudent with taxpayers’ money?

Opponents argue that social services should be funded by government, not privately funded. But not all social service providers want government funding, or more specifically, the strings and vulnerability attached. And not all public services are delivering the social outcomes expected, or value for money.

Opponents also point out that outcomes-based contracting can lead to perverse outcomes. That much is true, and this is where the execution of the model matters. A commitment to the social bonds pilot is a commitment to improving outcomes-based contracting.

And here’s where I think the Left have boxed themselves into a corner. Their aversion to innovative policy solutions, attracting alternative sources of funding, and measuring effectiveness and outcomes leaves only one welfare policy in their arsenal: spending money.

Our work at the Initiative has never pretended that social bonds are not without complications, and we were disappointed when the “first” first social bond collapsed at the negotiation stage.

But at least this Government is committed to exploring diverse welfare solutions: not just increasing spending (especially in an election year), but measuring and funding what works best for the people it serves.

That doesn’t sound overly right wing, does it?