So, spare a thought for Invercargill National MP Penny Simmonds, who in her first sitting week in Wellington as a freshly minted Cabinet minister has found herself caught up in the chaos and swirl occasioned by the man who made her a minister calling a caucus confidence motion in his continuing leadership of the National party.
More on that in a moment.
Tuesday’s caucus vote would have been uppermost in Simmonds’ mind, but not far behind would have been that the clock was fast ticking down to the House sitting at 2pm, and her debut as Minister for Science, Innovation and Technology to answer Question No 11.
But Ms Simmonds, not unnaturally, would obviously have wanted to get through the exercise without making any slips.
In that respect, Davidson had aided Simmonds by tipping his hand.
His question was specifically about job losses in the science sector, as opposed to the commonplace ‘‘stand by all statements and actions’’ questions beloved of the Opposition because they have the potential to blindside a minister with a line of inquiry they had not anticipated.
Hence Simmonds had the numbers to hand: ‘‘I note that the Stats New Zealand Research and Development Survey shows that employment in the sector increased from 28,200 roles in 2022 to 30,600 roles in 2024, with most of that growth in the private sector, which is, actually, where most R&D investment is made,’’ she said, before plunging on — at some length — about the $1.8 billion in funding for science committed in Budget 2025.
‘‘That is an exceptionally long answer,’’ Speaker Brownlee then harrumphed.
‘‘I would suggest that you edit the balance of your responses substantially.’’
Davidson’s first supplementary question was on the wisdom, or otherwise, of a proposal to cut 22% from primary industries and bioeconomy research — and was easily despatched by the minister.
‘‘Of course, it isn’t a cut,’’ Simmonds purred reassuringly.
‘‘It is a reallocation of funding to the Advanced Technology Institute,’’ she explained, before embarking on another lengthy exposition designed to test the Speaker’s patience.
‘‘Why, then,’’ Davidson next inquired, ‘‘is there no publicly available workforce strategy to retain or replace the scientists being made redundant?’’
Simmonds — who in her old job as Minister for Vocational Education spent a great deal of time preparing workforce strategies to align industry needs with the graduates being prepared by polytechnics — was not going to stumble on this one either.
‘‘Well, of course, the focus is on ensuring that we have a strong science and innovation sector, which engages with industry, to ensure that productivity and growth in our economy occurs because two-thirds of the R&D that happens in this country happens with our businesses.’’
Davidson then attempted to lay a glove on Ms Simmonds by asking about cuts to roles in hazard-monitoring teams — highly relevant given that as he was speaking Wellington was under a red severe weather warning.
‘‘We are very focused on ensuring that the critical work that is done in weather forecasting and climate research continues,’’ Simmonds said.
‘‘We’re bringing Niwa and MetService together in Earth Sciences so that we can get efficiencies and ensure that we reinvest in improvements to our climate science and our weather forecasting capabilities. We need to ensure that our funding is focused on those front-line scientists doing the research.’’
Davidson then doubled down by asking about geohazard monitoring — something the constituents represented by the MP for Christchurch East obviously have some interest in.
‘‘Look, I realise that change is never easy,’’ Simmonds empathised — while not actually directly answering the question — ‘‘but we are ensuring that our public research organisations are financially resilient and are focused and are putting their attention to the priority areas that they should be that will ensure our economy is strong and grows.’’
Later that day Simmonds, also Minister for Tertiary Education, was back in the House for the relevant part of the annual review debate.
Labour’s Shanan Halbert, a familiar but also more formidable opponent, was waiting with questions from some of the more arcane corners of the portfolio designed to test Simmonds.
‘‘I know that this minister is very willing to answer questions and in that manner I will be posing a number of questions,’’ he said promisingly, or menacingly, depending on your point of view.
But answer them she did, in a highly competent way, putting a positive end on a trying day.
Malcontent MPs — or not
Newstalk ZB reported this week that Southland MP Joseph Mooney was among National MPs dissatisfied with Christopher Luxon’s leadership and hoping to engineer change.
In response Mooney did not hold back, not only denying that he had been doing any such thing, but saying that he was going to make a complaint to the Media Council about ‘‘this outrageous breach of journalistic standards.’’
Well, he would say that some might cynically guffaw, but challenging journalists this specifically is rare.
For a start, their stories are often right: politicians will often deny that for their own purposes, and it’s usually much safer to shoot the messenger rather than give them a chance of a fair trial.
But earlier that day former Otago academic Bryce Edwards, who sends out a newsletter devoured by all with a keen interest in politics, had named who he believed the ‘‘furious five’’ were. Mooney was not one of them.
Quite how Mooney ended up on the ZB host Mike Hosking’s list may forever remain a mystery.
But Mooney is still spitting tacks over it and mulling his next move.
