David Seymour seems very relaxed about undermining his Prime Minister.
He did it last Friday. Luxon had called Seymour’s comments “ill-considered” and said “that message will be underscored to the ministers”. That’s what you’d expect a PM to say even if it’s just to shut a problem down. Theminister in question doesn’t have to love it but they mostly suck it up because it’s politics.
Not Seymour. He rebuffed the telling off by indicating he would in fact be the one telling off Luxon.
“I’m surprised to hear this, if you have a concern about another leader’s comments you should raise them directly rather than through media, which is what I now intend to do.”
He also did it in February. When Luxon killed off Seymour’s Treaty principles bill by saying National wouldn’t support it beyond select committee stage, Seymour said he didn’t believe Luxon.
And he sort of it did it again this week. The Act Free Press newsletter reported on the IPSOS polling that found two-thirds of Kiwis believe the country needs a strong leader to take the country back from the rich and powerful. Then - in a list of people that couldn’t possibly be that strong leader - it observed that Chris Luxon has “styled himself as an elite” aka among the rich and powerful.
Seymour has some plausible deniability here. He didn’t say it, the Free Press did. It wasn’t too nasty, but then it’s hardly nice because if Luxon isn’t a strong leader he’s a weak leader isn’t he?
Fair play. Seymour isn’t in the National Party. He is the leader of a completely separate party. He doesn’t have to even pretend to be disciplined by Luxon.
It’s also smart politics to keep reminding voters that he is independent. Plenty of Act voters used to vote for the Nats but defected on the promise of more radical change. If Seymour wants them to come back in 2026, he needs to be seen arguing for and sometimes delivering that radical change. If he doesn’t at least create that impression, he’ll go the way of United Future, the Alliance and the former version of the Māori Party in previous governments: political death by being forgotten.
But, Seymour runs the risk of taking it too far. It’s good politics to occasionally fight policy battles publicly. It’s acceptable to object to being disciplined by someone who isn’t your party leader. But it’s poor form to take a personal crack at your PM.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon. Photo / Mark Mitchell
No one likes watching a couple fight in public and this is the political equivalent of it. It suggests there’s worse going on behind closed doors. And with this government, that’s not wrong. Act and National are getting on each others’ nerves. Weirdly, everyone likes working with NZ First.
That was predictable. Once Winston gets what he wants - which is to travel the world - he’s happy and helpful. Seymour had obvious disdain for the Nats’ lack of principles even before the election. The Nats have never taken him and his policies seriously.
Taking it too far is a pattern for Seymour. He tanked his own campaign by threatening not to go into government at all. He released the secret code for priority Māori access to vaccines during Covid when people were probably too scared and stressed to think about much more than getting sick, getting their businesses open and getting out of Auckland.
Done well, Seymour’s on to a good thing. It’s smart for the leader of a cocky, self-assured small party to stand his ground. But he needs to be restrained. There’s a difference between disagreeing and undermining.
