Prime Minister rejects claims that there are too many ministers
But former ministers from across the political spectrum have backed Seymour's assessment and his calls to slash the number of ministers, portfolios and departments.
In a
speech on Thursday, Seymour proposed capping the executive
at just 20 ministers - all inside Cabinet - and scrapping associate positions, except in finance.
As well, he suggested slashing the 41 government agencies down to 30, with each minister assigned a single department rather than multiple symbolic portfolios.
The size and make-up of the executive is ultimately determined by the prime minister - in this case, Luxon.
Speaking from Dunedin on Friday, Luxon brushed off Seymour's suggestions and pointed out that ACT had pushed for a new department in the Ministry for Regulation.
"What we are focused on is making sure the public service is as efficient as it possibly can be."
Luxon denied the executive had become bloated or that many portfolios were mere symbolism, and he pushed back on those - like Seymour - questioning the value of the new South Island portfolio created earlier this year.
"Absolutely disagree, completely. We want to focus on the South Island. We want to make sure the South Island is getting its fair share of infrastructure and delivery, and I want the voice of the South Island in the Cabinet as well."
The new Minister for the South Island James Meager sits outside Cabinet. The only Cabinet minister based in the South Island is Matt Doocey, with responsibility for Mental Health.
Asked about the looming Budget, Luxon told RNZ the government would find savings across all departments but would not disband any of them entirely.
Speaking to RNZ, former National minister Christopher Finlayson said there were "far too many" ministers, associates and under-secretaries, mostly due to the nature of governing in a coalition.
"A few baubles have to be handed to otherwise unimpressive Members of Parliament who really shouldn't be there - or should be on a backbench."
Finlayson, now an independent barrister, served in Cabinet from 2008 to 2017 as Attorney-General and Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations.
He said he never needed associates and preferred a streamlined approach where each minister had clear responsibility for a single department: "And if you don't measure up, it's fail and farewell."
Christopher Finlayson.
Photo:
Nicola Edmonds
Finlayson described New Zealand's approach as borderline embarrassing: "if you send out a letter to someone and you're the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and then underneath it's got the Minister for Racing and the Minister for Railways... it looks kind of goofy to foreigners, I would have thought."
He said many portfolios could be eliminated, citing the recent South Island role as "pretty much a non-job". He also suggested a more coherent structure for government agencies.
"I've often sat down - and this will confirm that I'm a geek - and drawn up my list of government departments, and I think you could get it down to about 20.
"It's not just reducing the size of a bloated executive and jobs for the boys and the girls, but it's making a more effective administration."
Former United Future leader Peter Dunne - who was a minister outside Cabinet in both Labour and National governments - told RNZ future prime ministers should take a "much more rigorous" approach than their recent predecessors.
He suggested a structure of 15 ministers in Cabinet and six outside.
"There are a lot of portfolios which, as David Seymour says, are symbolic. The titles are there really to appease sector groups, rather than to deliver specific policy."
Former United Future leader Peter Dunne.
Photo:
RNZ
Dunne proposed consolidating certain portfolios - such as Internal Affairs, Local Government, and the Voluntary Sector - under a single umbrella.
However, he opposed a hard legislative limit on the number of ministers and questioned Seymour's comparison with Ireland.
Ireland's Constitution limits the size of its Cabinet to a maximum of 15 full ministers, but governments can also appoint junior Ministers of State - of which there are currently 23.
Of those, three are designated "super junior ministers" who attend Cabinet meetings - a practice currently being challenged in the courts.
Former Labour minister Stuart Nash said Seymour's argument had some merit, though considered it ironic coming from someone who had set up the new Ministry for Regulation.
Stuart Nash.
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
"Do you really need a new agency to reduce red tape?" Nash said.
"There would never have been a Minister of Regulation - or whatever David Seymour's title is - if it wasn't for ACT. Now is that necessary?"
Nash - who held several Cabinet roles from 2017 through to 2023 - said portfolios were often invented to placate coalition partners or key stakeholders.
"Do we really need a Minister of Fishing and Hunting?" Nash said.
"Under this government, there is now a Minister for Space and a Minister for Manufacturing. When I was [in charge of] economic development, both those portfolios were included [there]."
Still, Nash acknowledged there was sometimes a case for such standalone portfolios to send a message that they were a priority area.
In his Thursday speech, Seymour anticipated accusations of hypocrisy over the Ministry for Regulation and said that was different as his agency was designed to cut bureaucratic bloat, not expand it.
Seymour also argued regulation was a core function of government and so deserved its own oversight.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
Saplings, stalking, and spying: Government bills this week
A harvesting site in the Waimata Valley near Gisborne. Photo: RNZ / Alexa Cook This week in Parliament is a Members' Week, with Wednesday evening dedicated to debating non-government legislation. Members' Days cut into government time for lawmaking, so they have now added Wednesday morning to the schedule (rather than the usual 2pm start time for a sitting day) to maintain momentum. This week's bills are a mixture of unfinished business from last week and other bills plucked from the Order Paper that area waiting their respective next stages. Of particular interest are; The Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Scheme-Forestry Conversion) Amendment Bill is back in the House after truncated consideration by the Environment Committee. The bill seeks to address growing concerns about the conversion of farms into "exotic" forestry land, under the auspices of the Emissions Trading Scheme. The word exotic may evoke visions of coconut palms or banana trees, but it is the mass planting of pine trees that has largely been at the centre of the issue. Obviously not all farmland is the same, and New Zealand employs the Land Use Capability (LUC) scale to distinguish highly productive, arable land (LUC class 1) from very unproductive land (LUC class 8). This bill would determine a farm's eligibility for ETS registration based on its LUC rating and restrict the amount of exotic forestry conversion on farmland with an LUC rating between 1 and 6. "The current settings in the emissions trading scheme have tipped the scales too far," said the minister in charge of the bill, Todd Mclay, during the first reading. "We're seeing entire farms converted into exotic forests under the ETS from Invercargill to Ruatōria. These are not marginal lands; these are productive farms supporting families, communities, and local economies. Once they are planted into exotic carbon forests, they are, effectively, lost to food production for decades, if not permanently so." In that same debate, Labour offered what they have called very cautious support for the bill, citing the need to carefully work through issues in select committee. Meanwhile, the Green Party, who are against the bill, have said the real issue is that the whole concept of carbon offsetting is inherently flawed. "The fiction of offsetting has the same practical impact as an alcoholic paying somebody to drink water and thinking that they have solved their drinking problem", said Steve Abel. "That is the distortion that we have in this country to this day, and what's more, the person who's drinking all the water's making a lot of money and thinking that they're doing something about alcoholism, but they're not at all." There have been a number of bills this parliament relating to infrastructure, consenting, and public works, and getting those things done fast. This week's bill aims to speed up the acquisition of private land that is desired for projects listed in the Fast Track Approvals law, or under the Roads of National Significance programme. The Public Works debate was one of the three (Government Bill) committee stages this week. In the committee stage, debate is not time-limited, so it took a while, but was eventually wrapped up by midday Wednesday, before the House moved onto the second committee stage - the Hauraki Gulf / Tikapa Moana Marine Protection Bill , which was interrupted part of the way through its third and final part. The third planned committee stage was for a new stalking law (though the slow pace of debating makes progress on this bill this week unlikely). The last time this bill was in the House was for its second reading, when it received unanimous support from all parties after a robust select committee stage, during which several amendments were adopted. "The committee recommended a broader definition for the pattern of behaviour," National's Erica Stanford explained. "The offence will now require two specified acts within two years, rather than three specified acts within one year. This broadens the pattern of behaviour by capturing fewer acts across a longer time frame. I agree that this change will better address strategies such as anniversary-based stalking. It will also make it harder for stalkers to work around the law." Ginny Andersen is Labour's spokesperson on this. She applauded the adopted amendments but was worried that a remaining aspect might make prosecution difficult - intent. "Currently, it must be proven that the stalker acted knowingly, that their behaviour is likely to cause fear or distress to their target, so it means that the stalker has to know that their behaviour is likely to cause fear or distress. Proving that intent of someone who is lying or is genuinely deluded about how another person feels about them may well be extremely difficult to prove in a court of law and this is concerning." Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith has a second key bill up this week - The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill , which may resume its second reading (interrupted last week), probably on Thursday afternoon (but only if the pace of debating is brisk). It intends to fill gaps in criminal law concerning clandestine actions made on behalf of foreign actors intending to harm New Zealand, which the Government has said there has been an increased risk of. This law change would introduce treason, inciting mutiny or espionage - all on behalf of foreign actors - as new offences. Only the Green Party voted against the Bill at its first reading, although Te Pāti Māori were absent for the vote. Finally, among Thursday's bills is a brand new government bill, the recently announced bill to prohibit mounting protests outside someone's private residence. You can listen to the audio version of this story by clicking the link near the top of the page. RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, its legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk.
Otago Daily Times
9 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Future of Right to Repair Bill uncertain
By Anneke Smith of RNZ Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson says she's not giving up on her bill that would give consumers the right to get goods repaired. The Consumer Guarantees (Right to Repair) Amendment Bill would compel manufacturers to make repair parts available locally to consumers to extend the lifetime of products and reduce waste. The legislation was sent to Select Committee after passing its first reading in February this year with support from Labour, the Greens, Te Pāti Maori and New Zealand First. It appeared to have enough support to progress into law, but the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee has now recommended, by majority, that the bill not be passed. What the Consumer Guarantees (Right to Repair) Amendment Bill proposes: • Retain requirements for manufacturers to make repair facilities, parts, software, tools and information available to consumers. • Allow consumers to request that goods be repaired, rather than replaced. • Prevent the use of unauthorised repairers and parts from voiding manufacturers' guarantees. Davidson told RNZ New Zealand First appeared to have pulled its support for the legislation. "The reason we got it through first reading is because we had [support from] all of the opposition parties, plus New Zealand First, so we were able to get it to Select Committee, which was fantastic. "We heard from submitters, oral submissions, written submissions, overwhelming support for the bill. At the end of the select committee process, the bill was reported back, and, at least at this stage, the New Zealand First members have voted against progressing the bill." She said she would not give up on the bill, especially when she had adopted changes, including narrowing the goods covered to above $100 in value at the suggestion of government members. "It's a little rough to have done all that deep work to make the bill better but the positive is we have now got incredible improvements that we know government members were in support of because they helped us make them. "So there is massive mandate there for the public to have what they've asked for, which is the right to repair their own goods. " New Zealand First has not responded to RNZ's requests for comment. 'Serious concerns' about process raised in Select Committee report The committee's report on the Right To Repair Bill notes opposition parties had "serious concerns" about the way the committee had conducted its work on the bill. "Opposition members participated in this work in the reasonable expectation that such engagement was aimed at building genuine cross-party agreement," it said. "The result was otherwise. The committee spent significant time, and drew on the resources of Parliamentary Counsel and departmental advisors, to explore and draft changes to resolve the concerns of government members that they then ultimately chose not to support," the report states. "That decision is of course within their rights. But when extensive collaborative work is undertaken with the tacit implication that it might secure support, only for that support to be withheld, the effect is to undermine trust between members. "It also risks the perception that the process was used to keep the committee occupied rather than to improve the bill, at a cost to the public purse." The decision comes as the government rolls back a series of waste-reduction measures. The container-return scheme has been scrapped, plastic bans pared back and product stewardship rules delayed. In December 2024, the government quietly cancelled several waste minimisation initiatives focused on recycling and kerbside food scraps composting. Four out of five planned policies will no longer go ahead, including mandatory kerbside composting and recycling for all urban areas. A planned national Circular Economy & Bioeconomy Strategy was also put on hold.
Scoop
10 hours ago
- Scoop
Greens Stand With Our Teachers In Fight For Fair Pay
The Green Party supports the thousands of teachers striking for better pay and conditions today. 'The working conditions of our teachers are the learning conditions of our kids. It's time to support our teachers so they can support the next generation,' says the Green Party's spokesperson for Workplace Relations, Teanau Tuiono. 'We can, and must, ensure teachers in this country are paid fairly. We have everything we need to ensure our teachers are properly supported and that our students have what they need to thrive in school. 'It is an embarrassment that this Government can find billions of dollars for wealthy landlords, tobacco companies and fossil fuel executives but only a few pennies for our teachers. 'When you factor in inflation, what the Government has offered our teachers is effectively a pay cut. It's an absolute insult, and it's no wonder so many are fleeing the country under this Luxon-led Government. 'Enough is enough. Our educators deserve fair pay. Our tamariki deserve properly resourced schools. Parents deserve to know education in this country is being treated as a priority, not an afterthought. 'The Green Party wholeheartedly supports our teachers in their fight for fair pay and better working conditions. We are calling on the Government to listen to teachers and invest in our education as if our future depends on it. Because it does,' says Teanau Tuiono.
