Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has surprised everyone with his ruthlessness in sacking two of his ministers from their crucial portfolios. Removing ministers for poor performance after only five months in the job just doesn’t normally happen in politics.
Both demoted are National MPs - bad performances are arguably occurring with ministers from ACT and NZ First. Maybe if ACT and/or NZ First ministers were demoted 'ruthless' would be an apt description.
I don't share your generous interpretation of how Luxon's latest stunt is viewed by the voting public.
"...has a habit of cost overruns and poor financial management."
Luxon criticising Whaikaha Ministry of Disabled People.
And here: Chief executive of Disabilities Support Network Peter Reynolds speaking about the demotion of Penny Seymonds, with Lisa Owen, Checkpoint Wednesday 24 April 2024.
"I think the oportunity to replace the minister with one who is inside cabinet, who has some experience at ministerial management level, is helpful.
Having said that, we are greatful for Penny's tenure, we worked closely with her and found her to be a good Minister but in need of support in some areas."
When asked by Lisa Owen if he was politely saying 'the new minister is better than the old one' he replied
"I am politely saying that the new minister is possibly better than the old one. I don't attribute the handling of that issue entirely at the ministers feet - there were a lot of people with fingers in that pie, including some within Whaikaha to be fair.
But the issue around funding for Whaikahu and the disabilities sector has been an issue that has been around for years and years, and multiple governments have not really been able to address it. So in some respects I'm glad that it's come to a head, it's unfortunate that it's cost some people their jobs, but it needs to be addressed.
The reality is Whaikaha were underfunded from the word go, and the sector- the disabilities sector - has been underfunded for some years.
We've got to remember that the sector is entirely reliant on government funding, it doesn't get money from anywhere else.
Since 2017 we believe that we've lost pace with inflation to a tune of around 24% and that's massive in anybodies books.
If you're running a small business and you have a 24% cut - somethings gonna give, so I think the prime minister needs to undertake the review that's been suggested, we welcome that, it should throw a spotlight on the funding situation that the disabilities sector in New Zealand has been facing, and we look forward to a plan that would come out of that review to talk about how those issues are going to be addressed.
We don't believe the review is going to highlight 'massive overspends' and an 'out of control ministry' - quite the opposite.
Last year Whaikaha gave the sector a 3% uplift- inflation was 6.9% so that's effectively a cut.
How do you manage the increased costs that you're facing when you're reliant on that government funding?
That's the sort of stuff that needs to change.
I understand the government are in a parcarious state, they're trying to manage their budget, but at the same time the sector is really vulnerable at the moment, some people are teetering on the edge and they need a bit of reassurance and a bit of investment in contrast to what we have experienced for well over a decade."
So what does Luxon's "ruthless show" actually tell us?
Who is represented in Luxon's energised "invest" plans for Aotearoa New Zealand's future?
Because it seems pretty obvious to me that before dishing out tax cuts to the wealthy, Luxon's government is going to have to invest heavily in essential services that are grossly underfunded. Invest heavily in those peoples who are currently grossly under represented by government.
Luxon is going to have to use his evangelical 'energised' sermons to do more than roll ministers - ministers that HE failed - ministers who were given insufficient tools, time and support to do their jobs effectively.
Luxon can talk tough and say that he is not interested in taking 🤡, he can talk tough and say he's only interested in action - but if he fails to deliver on essential services - he's gone.
And that's without even talking about Section 7AA.
Labour lost the election because they failed to listen to voters who are concerned about two things:
Environmental resilience.
Equity.
If Luxon's government fails to demonstrate environmental and socio-economic responsibility - if they continue to appear illiterate in this regard - come 2026 they're gone.
Personally, I think Luxon just wrote his own headline - for when he gets rolled.
Unbalanced commentary. Arguably, this action show desperation to deflect further fallout for the party, not strong leadership..Lee couldn’t magic up the govt money to save media organisations. You could consider whether cabinet is actually inclined to help an ailing sector, one of many in fact . Do they generally object to the lack of urgency shown by Lee in helping the fourth estate?
Both demoted are National MPs - bad performances are arguably occurring with ministers from ACT and NZ First. Maybe if ACT and/or NZ First ministers were demoted 'ruthless' would be an apt description.
I don't share your generous interpretation of how Luxon's latest stunt is viewed by the voting public.
"...has a habit of cost overruns and poor financial management."
Luxon criticising Whaikaha Ministry of Disabled People.
And here: Chief executive of Disabilities Support Network Peter Reynolds speaking about the demotion of Penny Seymonds, with Lisa Owen, Checkpoint Wednesday 24 April 2024.
"I think the oportunity to replace the minister with one who is inside cabinet, who has some experience at ministerial management level, is helpful.
Having said that, we are greatful for Penny's tenure, we worked closely with her and found her to be a good Minister but in need of support in some areas."
When asked by Lisa Owen if he was politely saying 'the new minister is better than the old one' he replied
"I am politely saying that the new minister is possibly better than the old one. I don't attribute the handling of that issue entirely at the ministers feet - there were a lot of people with fingers in that pie, including some within Whaikaha to be fair.
But the issue around funding for Whaikahu and the disabilities sector has been an issue that has been around for years and years, and multiple governments have not really been able to address it. So in some respects I'm glad that it's come to a head, it's unfortunate that it's cost some people their jobs, but it needs to be addressed.
The reality is Whaikaha were underfunded from the word go, and the sector- the disabilities sector - has been underfunded for some years.
We've got to remember that the sector is entirely reliant on government funding, it doesn't get money from anywhere else.
Since 2017 we believe that we've lost pace with inflation to a tune of around 24% and that's massive in anybodies books.
If you're running a small business and you have a 24% cut - somethings gonna give, so I think the prime minister needs to undertake the review that's been suggested, we welcome that, it should throw a spotlight on the funding situation that the disabilities sector in New Zealand has been facing, and we look forward to a plan that would come out of that review to talk about how those issues are going to be addressed.
We don't believe the review is going to highlight 'massive overspends' and an 'out of control ministry' - quite the opposite.
Last year Whaikaha gave the sector a 3% uplift- inflation was 6.9% so that's effectively a cut.
How do you manage the increased costs that you're facing when you're reliant on that government funding?
That's the sort of stuff that needs to change.
I understand the government are in a parcarious state, they're trying to manage their budget, but at the same time the sector is really vulnerable at the moment, some people are teetering on the edge and they need a bit of reassurance and a bit of investment in contrast to what we have experienced for well over a decade."
So what does Luxon's "ruthless show" actually tell us?
Who is represented in Luxon's energised "invest" plans for Aotearoa New Zealand's future?
Because it seems pretty obvious to me that before dishing out tax cuts to the wealthy, Luxon's government is going to have to invest heavily in essential services that are grossly underfunded. Invest heavily in those peoples who are currently grossly under represented by government.
Luxon is going to have to use his evangelical 'energised' sermons to do more than roll ministers - ministers that HE failed - ministers who were given insufficient tools, time and support to do their jobs effectively.
Luxon can talk tough and say that he is not interested in taking 🤡, he can talk tough and say he's only interested in action - but if he fails to deliver on essential services - he's gone.
And that's without even talking about Section 7AA.
Labour lost the election because they failed to listen to voters who are concerned about two things:
Environmental resilience.
Equity.
If Luxon's government fails to demonstrate environmental and socio-economic responsibility - if they continue to appear illiterate in this regard - come 2026 they're gone.
Personally, I think Luxon just wrote his own headline - for when he gets rolled.
Unbalanced commentary. Arguably, this action show desperation to deflect further fallout for the party, not strong leadership..Lee couldn’t magic up the govt money to save media organisations. You could consider whether cabinet is actually inclined to help an ailing sector, one of many in fact . Do they generally object to the lack of urgency shown by Lee in helping the fourth estate?
Full of the usual conceited BS!