sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Media Minister Melissa Lee dumped from Cabinet with Penny Simmonds losing the Disabilities Issues portfolio

Public Policy / news
Media Minister Melissa Lee dumped from Cabinet with Penny Simmonds losing the Disabilities Issues portfolio
luxon-cabinet-coalition
The Coalition Cabinet meets for the first time in late 2023

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon dismissed his first ministers on Wednesday, taking the media portfolio away from Melissa Lee and disabilities portfolio off Penny Simmonds. 

Both dismissals come after high profile problems in these ministers' respective areas. 

Lee has been struggling to respond to the impending closure of Newshub, and Simmonds faced problems after a sudden pause in some Whaikaha funding. 

Luxon said the reshuffle's happening because issues in these portfolios had become more prominent and needed more senior ministers to handle them. 

“It has become clear in recent months that there are significant challenges in the media sector. Similarly, we have discovered major financial issues with programmes run by the Ministry of Disabled People,” he said in a statement. 

Paul Goldsmith will take the media and communications portfolio, replacing Melissa Lee who will drop out of Cabinet. 

She will retain her ethnic communities, economic development, and ACC portfolios.

Luxon said there were “significant synergies” between the media portfolio and arts, culture and heritage which was already held by Goldsmith. 

However, he warned there were “limited levers” the Government could pull, but Goldsmith would complete work already underway to ensure regulatory settings were appropriate. 

Louise Upston will take responsibility for disabilities issues, as it is already a departmental agency that sits within the Ministry of Social Development. 

Simmonds will continue with her environment and tertiary education portfolios.

The big winner of this reshuffle will be Simon Watts, the Minister for Climate Change and Revenue, who will now take Lee’s seat at the Cabinet table.

Luxon said he wanted to ensure the right people were in the right jobs and he would be willing to shift responsibilities as issues changed throughout the term in government.

He said it was disappointing for Lee, and that she he had said that to him, but he retained full confidence in her and Simmonds in their remaining portfolios.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

96 Comments

Actually managing performance!!?? Luxton really has no idea how government works.  Incompetence is ALWAYS excused in the first instance and if (as it usually does) it becomes pressed you hold a working party with interested stakeholders that will produce a report (probably).  If you are REALLY pressed then you have to upscale to a commission of inquiry that will product a report (sometime).

Don't they give new PM's an on-boarding handout these days?

Up
3

Probably one of the worst comments I've read on this site... Melissa Lee was a deer in the headlights.

Up
14

I've known her personally for over 25 years, she's a good person.  I feel sorry for her.  

Up
7

She may well be. Hasn't made herself look good over the years though, unfortunately. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/13603/pm-stands-by-lee-after-'silly…

Up
7

RNZ isn't the best place to go for unbiased impartial reporting of facts.
Their staff don't even know what a woman is even tho' so many women and ethnic minorities work there.

They're as bad as Newshub and TVNZ.

Up
0

No need to attack the source. This was widely covered and the statements from Melissa Lee and John Key spoke for themselves.

In particular, what part of the content in this RNZ article do you claim to be biased and not reporting facts?

FYI, perceptions of bias in media are inversely correlated with depth of engagement with the actual content: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8153466/

Up
0

I got thought that the story about when she could not answer questions from the media re her paper to the select committee was that she appeared to get bounced By Winston Peters because he claimed that he had not received a copy before the meeting.  Subsequently she was able show that his office had been sent a copy.  The fact that he had not read it was not her fault.  She was required to be the fall guy to save embarrassing Peters.  Yes I feel sorry for her too.  I get the impression that this government could disintegrate.  Internal National politics plus inter party rivalry. 

Up
4

Is this empathy from Yvil? 

 

I don't follow any commentators too closely (cept PDK who sticks out like dog balls), but feel this is the first time I've seen empathy from you.

 

If so, curious that you are empathetic for those you know, while.... otherwise....not.....

Up
5

Yes I'm empathetic towards people I know and therefore care about.  Empathy towards unknown posters hiding behind a moniker on the other hand, not so much.

Up
1

We need competent people in Cabinet. They don’t have to be good people. Being both competent and a good person is a bonus. I know plenty of good people. Very few of them would be capable of being a competent Cabinet Minister.

Up
2

I have an element of sympathy. She did seem a bit "deer in the headlights" but then again what exactly is a media minister meant to do in the context of legacy media being stuck in a terminal decline for a variety of different reasons.

At the end of the day, if consumers don't want to consume that media, and advertisers are less willing to pay, then that's "all she wrote". A bit crap for those whose livelihoods are affected, but I don't see the likes of Newshub closing down as being any more of a big deal than any other business closure. 

Journalists typically have an over-inflated sense of their value to society ... but if nobody is buying, then that tells us something. 

I support a singular, funded and free from advertiser influencer, multi-platform government broadcaster - aside from that what else should the government really be doing anyway with respect to the media? 

Up
17

Probably went to Willis , and was told there's no funding for any media assistance, or reduction in govt charges for transmission. Maybe she was just been honest when she said there was nothing she could do.

  

Up
7

I don't see why there should be any funding for media assistance (outside of funding the state broadcasting apparatus) - I think she was caught between a rock and a hard place, and a slightly poor delivery probably didn't help her. 

Up
2

TVNZ is expected to make a profit for the government. If the government paid for TVNZ so it didn't need advertising, like the ABC or BBC, then there would probably still be enough advertising money for a private competitor to stay in business.

Whether or not that would help in the long term is debatable I guess.

Up
4

I've never seen the point in trying to make TVNZ 'for profit'. As stated, I'd be in favour of having one "government news outfit" that can distribute news across multiple platforms (radio, TV, web, social media) with both national and regional focus. Fund it properly, try to make it as impartial as possible with a focus on fact-heavy reporting (as opposed to editorial content) and national/local interest stories that don't have commercial viability otherwise. This should be the only activity, with private media organisations left to sink or swim on their own merit and accord.

 

Up
8

Legacy business models are undergoing a huge challenge and local community journalism is a useful service to society.

So we likely receive societal benefit from some interim help with maintaining local journalism.

This is a very worthwhile read on it: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/news/new-york-times-publishe…

Not suggesting we always pay journalists.

Up
1

Exactly. Private media companies are no different to any other private company. The tax payer does not owe them a living. Although from some of the recent reactions by employees of such you would think they consider themselves to be exempt from redundancy. That’s for lesser beings isn’t it?

Up
4

No news media, no accountability.

Up
3

Sooner have that than keep us afloat and we’ll say what you like.

Up
0

There's no shortage of news, last time I checked ... just that the 'production & distribution mechanism' is undergoing serious structural change (based on consumer preferences, the willingness of advertisers to pay, and the increasing ease with which anybody distribute news content online). 

My life is more impacted by the cafe down the road closing the other day, than it is by Newshub shutting up shop. 

Up
4

Actually it turns out local journalism has been the most common victim of business model challenges worldwide. There is no shortage of syndicated international news.

Up
3

What is likely to change is the standards of investigating a story, verifying with multiple sources, assessing different points of view etc. Not that trad media has been perfect at this, but some guy ranting on Facebook is likely to be a downgrade. 

Up
1

I agree with a multi-platform government broadcaster but when the majority of our media identify themselves as left leaning that is not going to pan out.

I think the fact that the buying audience has moved onto mobile platforms for their media means that traditional media ether had to move with their audience or disappear.

Up
4

The decline/possible death of NZ MSM is what I call creative destruction, I expect something far better to emerge even nothing would be an improvement.

Up
8

dumbT. Given it's now established that MSM journalism is politically biased to the left how would you ensure your nirvana of 'free from influencer' output is delivered ?

Up
2

"Melissa Lee was a deer in the headlights."

She lost her script.

It said, "When faced with uncomfortable questions you can not answer, commiserate and empathize with the questioner(s), point out "this is complex issue with far reaching considerations", and tell them you and your team are working hard in resolving it but the issue is commercially sensitive and you have no further comment at this time."

Up
1

Just curious - what expert credentials do you actually have to provide your stern verdict?

Up
2

"Luxton really has no idea how government works"

And you seem to have no idea who the Prime Minister of NZ is.

Up
15

Wtf is it with NZ politicians and the public's inability to spell their names correctly.

  • Helen Clarke
  • John Keys
  • Jacinta Ardern (or Jacinda Adern)
  • Chris Luxton

None of these people have particularly difficult-to-spell names.

Up
13

Well, sadly it's an indication of many people's level of english.  You could also get a clue from reading the article where PM "Luxon" is mentioned multiple times.

Up
4

Grammar Nazi's pretending correct spelling is in anyway relevant on a commentary feed, sadly it's an indication of peoples level of social skills.

Up
5

This post is comedic genius and I'm not falling for it. Instead I'll share the following joke, to be used with pedantic people:

You: You're such a pedantic.

Them: You mean pedant!

Up
4

JustAnOpinion

,"Grammar Nazi's". Here Nazis is the plural, so does not require an apostrophe. Why is this so difficult to understand?  Then you write 'peoples' with NO apostrophe. You should be sent to a grammar education camp for intensive tuition.

Up
2

Commenters should familiarise themselves with Fowler's Modern English Usage. It can be found on the Internet and is free to download. Don't just use it for reference, make it a daily read.

Up
0

"Grammar Nazi's pretending correct spelling is in anyway relevant on a commentary feed, sadly it's an indication of peoples level of social skills."

It's rather an indication of the poster's education and intellect.  

Up
1

Yvil, English is spelled with a capital "E"!

Up
5

I think it's a rambling incoherent boomer thing.  

Up
1

Misspelling Jacinda Ardern is somewhat forgivable as Ardern has a red squiggle under it when typing a new comment. However Jacinta is unforgiveable as it is a different name with a different sound.

Up
2

Less than six months operational as government. Luxon took over the appearance of a squabbling, disgruntled and disjointed brat pack and shaped them up sufficiently to restore discipline and credibility and gain the greatest number of seats in parliament. All this in less than a year.This move relatively early in the term signals that there will be no reverting to such nonsense and within that, that means inferior performance. As such, the PM’s call, totally, emphatically.

Up
3

Bollocks, National should have romped home with the level of dissatisfaction with Labour. 

He fumbled and faux-paxed his way to the point support for National was so low he could only govern with fucking Winston Peters. Worse National leader in living memory. 

Up
10

Dastardly Winston then.  2017 the saviour. 2023 the devil.

Up
1

No, same Winston.

Up
4

agnost. Yeah, agree with your point that Luxon should have bolted home. I sat only metres away from him at a pre election lunch presentation where I studied him closely. I came away unconvinced and no closer to getting a handle on him. I feared he was just another high IQ slick corporate snake oil shyster, a familiar type to me from a long corporate career. But always in the back of my mind was his high level success in a volume consumer business in one of the worlds most brutal markets. I'm still on the fence but this ruthless type of action keeps alive glimmers of hope that he might have what it takes to reverse the slide in NZs fortunes.    

Up
6

Rather unusual six years. National in 2017 were without a viable coalition partner, had  become complacent & conceited. This the electorate considered and delivered a Labour led government with WP/NZF inserted as a safety brake,  the Greens sidelined. 2020 the electorate rewarded the government’s handling of covid but took out its displeasure at some aspects by ditching WP/NZF but at the same time used the mechanisms of MMP to keep the Greens sidelined. In other words they used MMP to defeat the principles of MMP and in essence returned a FPP government. Come 2023 Labour was in about as much disarray as National post 2017 so the electorate went back to the drawing board and reinstated WP/NZF again a safety brake you might well say. Personally I was skeptical of the merits of WP/NZF returning but on form so far are actually now somewhat relieved by the presence in government.

Up
6

Haha, reverse NZs fortunes. Good one.

Giving property investors back their deductions just put the slide into full gear. The only thing that will arrest the slide is cheaper house prices and pushing money away from residential housing. 

I'm still waiting for one positive thing from them.

Up
5

🤡 

Up
1

Lee doesn't seem up to speaking to media, cant seem to think fast enough and say the right thing. The second time around her feelings for the media staff were so false. Was never up to being a cabinet minister obviously.

Up
8

Our prime minister is called Luxon. It ain’t that hard 

Up
1

I can’t work out if this is sarcasm or serious. Thanks for the laugh

Up
0

Great moves! (from a usually disapproving leftie)

Up
11

Why is it a great move?

Up
0

Because both were absolutely useless at being a minister? Should never have been put in that position in the first place.

Up
6

Bring back Maureen Pugh, Simon's favourite. 

Up
5

- From the outside it sure looks like she was having a mare

- Puts other ministers on notice, both re performance, and perception 

- Re-inforces the image he'll 'take the tough decisions'

 

Up
1

Why have a Minister of Broadcasting at all? Disestablish the roll entirely or break it up.

As for TVNZ, it's garbage and should be sold for scrap.

Up
14

I can't remember which decade I stopped watching TVNZ

Up
4

It was crazy Simon Watts was not in cabinet.

 

Up
1

Good to see his business acumen coming through...bad news,redundancies,re-structuring...always release bad news on a Friday afternoon,or even better still,before a public holiday that is likely to be extended by most to 4 days...business 101 ,Merry Christmas,oh and good luck seeking new employment.

It's yesterdays news by the time Monday comes around.

Up
3

This decisive action compares well with the Michael Wood saga. No need to beat around the bush when someone is in a position of importance that they are not capable of undertaking

Up
3

More David Clark IMO

Up
1

Chippie in shouty big boy pants mode suggests labour would crack down even harder on under performing ministers. Short memory - he was part of the cabinet that decided David Clark shouldn't be sacked for multiple breaches of the covid lockdown rules because 'we can't afford the disruption'.  

Up
2

Given the last AUT survey that says the decline in trust in news media seems to be accelerating, why would anyone support something that is failing in so many areas, in it's current form?

The media have to evolve to regain that public trust, but there seems to be a lot of virtue signalling, posturing and self-promotional noise - with very little introspection and change.

Got to say that it's refreshing to see accountability for not getting the job done. Very much at odds with the usual strategy of deny, deflect, maneuver and hang on to the job like grim death.

Up
5

Bit more to it than "they're not telling me what I want to hear so they're failing": https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/news/new-york-times-publishe…

Up
1

I have some knowledge of the disability sector.
1. The new Ministry for Disabilities is financially disfunctional. Not Penny Simmonds fault, but maybe she was having trouble dealing to them. But also there is not much there to build upon.
2. There has been outrage from the disability sector over changes in some rules. Quite ridiculous outrage in fact. The carer support funding is subject to massive fraud, mostly ignored. Short of fraud there are very odd uses of those funds.
But they know outrage works because politically you are always on a loser if you argue back. It’s politics.
Changing this takes years of hard work, which the ministries are not competent to accomplish

Up
4

Care to share some examples of fraud? The inability for those funds to be used for respite for carers is abhorrent. The amount of unpaid care these carers provide usually at the expense of their own careers is massive. 

Up
1

Examples. 

Taking the money and not taking the break. 

False $ claims -  ie somebody claiming they were the alternative carer, but did not actually do it.  Splitting the money with the actual carer.

And.  You provide misinformation when you say "The inability for those funds to be used for respite for carers".  Actually there are vast sums paid for respite.  It continues.

And.  Your last sentence is an example of what I explained.  You are on a loser trying to argued with the disabled.  Plain politics.  (even when they are wrong)

Up
4

In some ways it reminds me of the original Health minister during the start of  Covid who Labour sacked early on due to issues communicating and the public perception. This is politics for you. It is ruthless.

Up
1

There's no comparison at all. David Clark personally repeatedly broke Covid rules Labour was telling everyone else in the country to follow & eventually resigned. He was given repeated chances by Jacinda who was weak & irresponsible not sacking him the first time - "to encourage the others".

NZ now being led through a pandemic by a lame duck health minister | interest.co.nz

David Clark resigns as Health Minister: 'It's best for me to step aside' | RNZ News

'Unhelpful distraction': Health Minister David Clark resigns - NZ Herald

Up
6

"There's no comparison at all"

Of course there isn't National can do no wrong for kiwikidz hahahha

Up
4

Your usual comprehensive & eloquent ad hominem address to my well referenced point.

Why are you here?

Up
6

The Praetorian Guard never admits defeat, even if the decimation has left only two of them.

Up
2

kiwis. Agree Clark's high handed arrogance is not equivalent to Lees performance ineffectiveness but the triggering principle is the same, ie fail to deliver and perish. The difference is style; Luxon's ruthless response sends a clear message of expectation right through the executive and public service. 

Up
3

Ruthless? Decisive is the better adjective I would say.

Up
1

Yep. Living through the era of kindness and compassion has eroded my appreciation of the difference.  

Up
2

The problem is he's getting increasingly snippy at Winston and Seymour but can't actually do anything about them other than publicly whip them, which makes all 3 look silly.

Up
4

nnz. So the inherent nature of MMP in action then. 

Up
1

True. MMP finally delivers NZ an actual format of the type of government MMP is structured to produce. That is a coalition rather than,  as up until now, a traditional major party with a lackey, and immediately those favouring the defeated traditional major party, decry the working of a true MMP government. So it would seems to them that democracy under MMP is totally misrepresented simply because it did not produce an agreeable result. Suggestion then. Go and live somewhere else, say between Moscow and Beijing, and see how you enjoy that version of democracy.

Up
2

The NZ public has low and declining (relative to other countries) trust in the Media. David Seymour says, this should be a cause for reflection for the Media. Instead, Melissa Lee sacrificed because media control the story in their own interests.

Meanwhile, Willie Jackson who butchered the media portfolio gets in free hits courtesy of Newshub and TVNZ. Bias anyone?

Up
6

At this rate there will only be Willis and Bishop left, how many days since they got into power? 

Up
4

Best to leave the bishop’s willy out of it.

Up
8

there will be no light to shine on them, unless you have a genset.....

Up
0

Popcorns are on sale at New World.

Up
1

for his credit he cannot do anything about his partners and their ministers running amuck and causing all sorts of problems, so he picked the two weaker performing ministers and used them to show he is a strong leader, ironically they were both better than the ACT and NZF cabinet ministers than are going to end up losing him the next election. 

Up
6

I hadn't looked at it in such a cynical way. I actually respected him for taking action, but maybe it was sacrificing two nobody's to try to project power, I'll have to ponder that one. 

Up
5

Wouldn’t see lefties being so honest and business minded…they’d rather try and save face

Up
1

The country isn't a business. Otherwise Luxon would have fired all the bottom feeders.

Up
2

Instead he's borrowing to give them a tax cut

Up
2

Maybe it is being run like a business, well a corporate.  If you've every worked for a Multi-National corporate, they can be great at own goaling themselves during hard times by rolling out redundancies in operations, starving them of capital to replenish inventory and maintain plant etc, all to preserve the CEO/Board/Shareholder's entitlement to a certain level of return.  

Up
3

At the very least let us all be grateful that we haven't got the past directors and CEOs of the likes of Fletcher Building and Z Energy running the country.  Luxon is brilliant in comparison as an ex-private sector CEO.

Up
0

Mind you, he was CEO of a taxpayer-supported company.

Up
0

"This is how I roll"

Very smug.

Up
4

Yeah,and it's always someone else's fault.the other day he said he would hold dept heads to account , if their shit policy causes unpopular results. You have to cut, if you can't cut jobs without causing unrest,  your out. Doesn't matter as long as  there is someone to blame and fire

 Typical corporate bull.

Up
6

Lee and Simmonds were both a bit lightweight. However he gave them those portfolios only five months ago, so what does it really say about his judgement. He was flexing. Look at me, all powerful....

Up
3

National needs to work out whether the cost of aligning with NZF is worth the stench of corruption and sleeze that will hang around them for the foreseeable future. Tobacco was the first indication this administration was heading towards corruption, these sort of stories are going to keep coming. 

Sacking 2 nobody ministers is not going to keep the public distracted enough for 3 years...

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/quarry-connected-to-55000-donati…

Up
6

Pushed straight onto upturned swords, how noble.

Up
1

If Luxon wants to show he is on top of "govt" he needs to sort out the allocation of portfolio's and rationalise them and Ministers. Its a pretty weird mix between ministers and way more portfolio's than necessary - especially in the social welfare arena.  This is a set up for poor policy, delay and excessive cost over and above the salaries of the civil servants involved

Not sure why people get excited about Simon Watts - seems to be another minister that actually doesnt have a good understanding of his portfolio which is of concern given the implications for everybody of getting it wrong

Up
1