Hoping to keep sweet with Donald Trump probably explains why the PM wriggles, writhes and squirms when asked about the legality of the American attack on Iran.
His failure to answer questions about domestic issues is not so understandable.
For example, the Greens’ Chlöe Swarbrick yesterday asked in Parliament:
Is the Prime Minister aware of how many people, including children, have been kept or made homeless as a result of his Government’s decisions to tighten access to emergency housing, implement benefit sanctions, and more?
Christopher Luxon should have been able to say, yes, he is aware of the number.
Or he might have said no, he does not have that number with him, but he will come back with it.
He did neither.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I’ve said to the member before, I’m very proud that we’ve made house purchasing more affordable. Rents have come down, I think 6,000 or 7,000 people have come off the social housing wait-list, and, when I last looked, 2,100 children have been moved out of emergency housing into proper, dry homes, and there’s big investment going in and support happening in homeless situations as well.
Swarbrick raised a point of order to complain the Prime Minister did not address the question, which was whether he is tracking any data on how many people have been made or kept homeless as a result of the Government’s decisions to tighten access to emergency housing.
She was unsuccessful.
SPEAKER: Well, I think it would be pretty unreasonable to listen to the data that he’s just given and not conclude that there’s some analysis being done.
Another question – with 59 words in its one testing sentence – was not easy to digest.
Chlöe Swarbrick: If he ignored advice and concerns from social service providers and experts that reducing access to emergency housing would result in more homelessness, then went ahead with it anyway and we saw more homelessness, will he, then, take the advice of social service providers and experts that his move-on orders will only exacerbate the problems associated with homelessness?
Put another way, would the PM reconsider the government’s move-on orders if someone gave him data showing this was worsening the homelessness problem?
The leader of a government which tries to base its policies on the relevant facts – and revises those policies when the facts change – would jump at the chance to say yes.
Luxon took a different approach.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I’ve said to the member, I would put this Government’s record up against the Labour-Greens Government’s record, when there was a 37 percent increase in homelessness and a billion dollars being spent on emergency housing. I’m proud of the progress that we’ve made, and I’m proud of the fact that our homeless action plan is starting to pay benefit.
But the move-on policy is new.
Critics have called it unworkable and “draconian”, particularly the provisions for NZ$2,000 fines or up to three months in prison as penalties for breaches.
And there’s something whiffy about a plan which requires homeless people to be kicked out of a city’s central business district and sent to…
Well, sent where?
On the night of the 2023 Census, there were 112,496 people experiencing homelessness. The most common form of homelessness was living in uninhabitable housing, followed by sharing accommodation.
It would be comforting to hear the PM say he would take another look if the new policy worsened those figures. It’s a pity he can’t or won’t.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
Christopher Luxon should have been able to say, yes, he is aware of the number.
Or he might have said no, he does not have that number with him, but he will come back with it.
He did neither.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I’ve said to the member before, I’m very proud that we’ve made house purchasing more affordable. Rents have come down, I think 6,000 or 7,000 people have come off the social housing wait-list, and, when I last looked, 2,100 children have been moved out of emergency housing into proper, dry homes, and there’s big investment going in and support happening in homeless situations as well.
Swarbrick raised a point of order to complain the Prime Minister did not address the question, which was whether he is tracking any data on how many people have been made or kept homeless as a result of the Government’s decisions to tighten access to emergency housing.
She was unsuccessful.
SPEAKER: Well, I think it would be pretty unreasonable to listen to the data that he’s just given and not conclude that there’s some analysis being done.
Another question – with 59 words in its one testing sentence – was not easy to digest.
Chlöe Swarbrick: If he ignored advice and concerns from social service providers and experts that reducing access to emergency housing would result in more homelessness, then went ahead with it anyway and we saw more homelessness, will he, then, take the advice of social service providers and experts that his move-on orders will only exacerbate the problems associated with homelessness?
Put another way, would the PM reconsider the government’s move-on orders if someone gave him data showing this was worsening the homelessness problem?
The leader of a government which tries to base its policies on the relevant facts – and revises those policies when the facts change – would jump at the chance to say yes.
Luxon took a different approach.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I’ve said to the member, I would put this Government’s record up against the Labour-Greens Government’s record, when there was a 37 percent increase in homelessness and a billion dollars being spent on emergency housing. I’m proud of the progress that we’ve made, and I’m proud of the fact that our homeless action plan is starting to pay benefit.
But the move-on policy is new.
Critics have called it unworkable and “draconian”, particularly the provisions for NZ$2,000 fines or up to three months in prison as penalties for breaches.
And there’s something whiffy about a plan which requires homeless people to be kicked out of a city’s central business district and sent to…
Well, sent where?
On the night of the 2023 Census, there were 112,496 people experiencing homelessness. The most common form of homelessness was living in uninhabitable housing, followed by sharing accommodation.
It would be comforting to hear the PM say he would take another look if the new policy worsened those figures. It’s a pity he can’t or won’t.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
2 comments:
>"I’m very proud that we’ve made house purchasing more affordable. Rents have come down....."
Hey, what difference does it make to most homeless people that a house that cost a million before now costs 'only' 850 grand? What difference does it make to most of them that the rent they would have to pay has fallen from two-thirds of their income to only half? Get real, will ya?
Let's get one thing clear and actually state the facts.
The term "Homeless" is a colossal misnomer.
It's a term used by politicians, do-gooders, bleeding hearts and fools who either don't understand or deliberately lie to divert attention away from the real issue -
Which is MENTAL HEALTH.
The "homeless" all suffer from addictions and mental health problems.
I am sick of journalists who don't make this plain. It's misinformation on a grand scale, dishonest and cowardly.
Being "homeless" and "housing" are nearly completely different issues.
Sufferers of mental health NEED the services of mental health providers.
Bunging them into a nice house or even a prison cell will not help either way.
Only when we are honest about any issue and start using words that explain the TRUTH will any problem get solved.
Until then just expect it to get worse.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.