Yet too often, our national carrier is judged as if it were a standard commercial business.
That is not the role we ask it to play.
We expect Air New Zealand to be profitable, reliable and efficient.
We expect it to connect a geographically dispersed country, maintain a nationwide network where routes vary widely in their economics, to support tourism and to represent New Zealand proudly on the world stage.
Each of those expectations is reasonable. Taken together, they are not.
New Zealand has built an aviation system that reflects what we want as a country more than what pure economics would sustain.
For years, Air New Zealand has carried that gap – remaining viable while meeting national needs.
That is not mismanagement. It is the job we have given it.
It is also important to be clear about the environment it is operating in. Most comparisons are not like for like.
Airlines such as Qantas operate across a much larger domestic market, with a higher population density, multiple hubs and longer average distances. They also operate under full private ownership, with greater freedom to make commercial decisions about where they fly, with less viable routes often supported directly by the Government.
That is a different model to the one we have built here – we continue to expect our national airline to carry broader responsibilities without the same level of direct support.
Air New Zealand operates from one of the most remote positions in global aviation, with a small home market. That reality shapes everything from cost to frequency to resilience.
At the same time, the industry is facing very real pressures.
Fuel costs have moved sharply. Aircraft availability remains constrained. Supply chains are still recovering. System costs are high.
These are factors that sit largely outside the control of any airline, but they directly affect performance.
Against that backdrop, the idea that current challenges are simply a function of management does not reflect the full picture.
What is missing from the conversation is the airline’s broader role.
For a country as remote and sparsely populated as ours, a globally relevant national airline is not a luxury – it is a strategic necessity.
Air New Zealand brings roughly half of all tourists to our shores. It connects us to key markets for trade, investment and influence. Its importance goes well beyond transporting passengers.
Recent global attention on the airline’s Skynest – an economy-class sleep pod and a genuine world-first product – highlights another critical point.
Innovation matters. For a country as distant as New Zealand, standing still is not an option. We have to invest to remain competitive and compelling.
We pride ourselves on backing New Zealand success stories, but we can also be surprisingly quick to diminish them.
In aviation, that comes at a cost. If we fail to support ambition, we should not be surprised when it fades.
None of this changes the reality that many New Zealanders are feeling the impact of higher airfares. But these pressures are global. Airlines operate on thin margins even in good times; shocks are quickly felt.
History shows that airline performance closely tracks the broader economy.
In New Zealand, that relationship is even more pronounced, given how reliant we are on tourism, trade and connectivity.
Which brings us to the core issue.
If Air New Zealand behaved like a purely commercial airline, parts of the domestic and regional network would look very different.
And when services are withdrawn, they are not reliably replaced. Other airlines enter when conditions suit and leave when they do not. New Zealand has seen that cycle before.
A national carrier operates differently. It provides continuity the market alone does not. But that only works if the system around it is aligned.
That means being clear about trade-offs. It means recognising that investment in infrastructure, the way costs are recovered and the expectations placed on the airline all interact.
At present, different parts of the system are often optimised in isolation.
If we want a national airline that delivers connectivity, supports tourism, competes globally and continues to innovate, then the system has to be set up to support those outcomes.
That requires co-ordination between airlines, airports, regulators and the Government.
It requires discipline in how costs are introduced into the system.
And it requires a shared understanding of what we are asking the national airline to carry on behalf of the country.
Because if we do not take that approach, we should not be surprised when the system delivers less and New Zealand loses something far more important than an airline balance sheet.
Catch up on the debates that dominated the week by signing up to our Opinion newsletter – a weekly round-up of our best commentary.