Having found an extra $1.2 billion when the final budget result was tallied in October - bringing the 2016-17 surplus to a fat $5.7 billion - Perrottet's review is likely to sound a positive note as the calendar year draws to a close.

It's not just the budget that is booming in NSW. The state sits at the top of league tables ranking the Australian states and territories by their broader economic performance.

NSW's Triple A credit rating is intact and unemployment is at a respectable 4.6 per cent.

All of which confirms that economic management is this government's strong suit.

It's a hard-won reputation off the back of controversial policy decisions like public service job cuts and wage caps and a massive program of asset privatisation including electricity network businesses and the Land and Property Information service.

It's also why the astonishingly negative public reaction of the government's plan to spend $2.5 billion knocking down and rebuilding three Sydney sports stadiums will have strategists up at night.

The essential problem with the policy is that it screams two things, profligacy and arrogance, each of which is poison for any government.

As such it threatens to undermine the good work the government has done to give itself a reputation as a cautious and responsible manager of our money.

The profligacy argument is simple: the government is now proposing to spend $2.5 billion knocking down and rebuilding ANZ, Allianz and Parramatta stadiums when it had proposed as recently as last year to spend $1.6 billion.

The impression of arrogance stems from how neither Gladys Berejiklian nor Stuart Ayres has seen fit to explain why then premier Mike Baird's announcement of April 2016 - to upgrade, not demolish, ANZ and rebuild Parramatta with Allianz as the last priority - has suddenly been trashed.

The government is trying to contextualise the spending to nullify Luke Foley's line of attack that he favours spending the money on schools and hospitals.

It is highlighting that it is spending $200 billion on health and education over the period it will take to rebuild the stadiums and the $2 billion expenditure on ANZ and Allianz represents just 1 per cent of that.

It has also tried to cast the plan as a responsible economic endeavour by highlighting an anticipated boost to jobs and tourism. Berejiklian has argued that the two stadiums generate about $1 billion in revenue annually.

"So if you actually take that assumption over two years we're paying back their cost," she has said.

Yet the government has not released a single document to back up these claims; no economic impact study, business case or benefit-cost ratio.

All we have is a one-page media release and the enthusiastic endorsement of those who will directly benefit: the major football codes and powerbrokers on the Sydney Cricket and Sports Ground Trust such as businessman Tony Shepherd and 2GB's Alan Jones.

Asked if she would release the business case upon which the decision was based, Berejiklian dismissively responded she would do so "at the appropriate time".

Is it any wonder that none of the government's lines seem to be cutting through?

The experience drives home a couple of points: a state government is often regarded by voters as only as good as the management of its most recent project; and just because you have the money doesn't mean you can spend it if the public is not on board.

There are increasing calls for Berejiklian to perform yet another backdown on this policy, along the lines of those executed over a ban on greyhound racing, forced council amalgamations and introduction of the Fire and Emergency Services Levy.

She is standing firm for now, no doubt hoping community anger will dissipate over the Christmas and New Year break.

The problem is that when she took the job in February one thing she highlighted was her government's willingness to listen to the community. On this issue the Berejiklian government appears to be doing precisely the opposite.