He again frustrates the right wingers who want lower spending, tax cuts and less government intervention.
At the same time, he exasperates those who want more decisive action on housing, welfare, the environment and so on.
Why doesn't the Government do more here, there and just about everywhere is the regular cry from various interest groups.
Conservative Mr English, delivering his 8th Budget, steers a middle course appealing, he intends, to middle New Zealand.
Some might say the result is a middling performance.
Where is the significant economic transformation?
Where is the "vision''?
Where are the fresh thinking and bold policies?
This year, where are the critical moves or the strategy to confront the housing crisis?
That is not the English way.
It is evolution rather than revolution, incremental change, not upheaval.
It is prudent, not reckless, cautious, not audacious, predictable, not exciting.
After all, Mr English can look back on his steady steering of the ship of state through the troubled waters of the Global Financial Crisis, the impact of the Canterbury earthquakes and the collapse of dairy prices.
A radical Minister of Finance might have spent up to stimulate or, at the other extreme, slashed and burnt to prevent increased indebtedness.
Mr English did neither, steaming through the choppy seas by accepting it was necessary to run deficits as he endeavoured to chart a course back to surplus and to debt repayment.
There is a time for every purpose under the influence of world forces.
According to Mr English, the time has arrived to spend a little more while aiming to reduce debt from 26% of GDP to 20% by 2020.
That way, New Zealand would be in better shape to cope with the uncertainties of what the day after tomorrow might bring.
Combined with the cost of dangled tax cuts via Prime Minister John Key, this goal seems unrealistic.
The surpluses for the coming two years at a predicted $700 million are small, although they are then expected to rise rapidly.
At least, the course is correct.
National is doing its very best to win a fourth term, and is willing to spend in basic areas - ahead of debt repayment or tax cuts - to ameliorate public concerns.
That means more money for the big spending areas of social welfare, health and education.
Part of this is driven by public pressure, much by increased population and part by the "investment approach'' to social issues.
There is more money for the replacement of Child, Youth and Family and, interestingly, the targeting of some schools' money via children from beneficiary families.
The Government is serious about alternatives to decile funding.
No doubt, in the coming days, negative reactions will continue from areas that have missed out.
The subsidy for preschool children, for example, has again not increased.
Smokers have reason to be grumpy, and the Government will save about $350million by cutting the emissions trading subsidy.
It is encouraging to see more money going towards research and innovation.
Like a focus on vulnerable children, extra funding towards research and innovation will not return significant dividends for years.
Positive, too, is funding for the roll-out of a bowel cancer screening programme, even if it is not as fast or comprehensive as some would want.
National recognises it has to show some compassion and concern, that it cares about the social ills of the nation if it is to hold the hearts of many voters.
Hence, extra spending comes before tax cuts, or even restoring tax levels crimped by "bracket creep''.
The Budget also sets the Government up for the election next year.
Mr English knows the importance to the electorate of safe economic management and, as he emphasised yesterday, "stability''.
His and his government's style is to steer that middle course and not rock the boat.
