Photo: RNZ
Analysis: Christopher Luxon is facing another week of awkward questioning from the opposition over the handling of school lunches, and his own Education Minister Erica Stanford is in part to blame.
The whole school lunch political fiasco is a problem for the government and ultimately it is David Seymour who was in charge of it and promised to provide nutritious meals for less. He has set himself a deadline of term two to fix it.
However, it was increasingly clear after the exchanges between Stanford and Seymour, via the media on Tuesday, that all is not well in their relationship.
What Seymour encountered on Tuesday was Stanford creating a perception that she had summonsed her associate to a meeting about the continued fallout over the school lunches programme, when in actual fact the meeting had been planned since 17 February and it was not the only item on the agenda.
Stanford does not have the power to summons Seymour and it was no great surprise he did not make it to the meeting.
By the time he got out of his own caucus meeting on Tuesday, Stanford's comments, which she had made on her way into National's caucus meeting, were already all over the news for Seymour to read.
Stanford told reporters,"I've asked David Seymour for a meeting this morning, to go through some of the issues with the school lunch programme to make sure they're being cleared up".
That created the illusion that the meeting was hastily called at her direction given the continued bad headlines around school lunches, most recently the health hazard of melted plastic being found in the ones delivered to Murchison Area School.
Stanford's own office clarified with RNZ a short time after her comments that the meeting was a regular one, and last week the minister had asked for school lunches to be the first item on the agenda, before news of the melted plastic saga had even broken.
In her interview ahead of caucus Stanford was asked if she had confidence in Seymour to fix the problems, to which she replied "that's why I'm meeting with him today to find out what the plan is moving forward".
It was not for Stanford to have confidence in Seymour, it was the Prime Minister that appointed him and he needed to maintain confidence with him, something Luxon has insisted he still does.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon. Photo: Samuel Rillstone / RNZ
But by not directly saying she had confidence in him, or that it was for Luxon to answer that, she created a sense that she did not.
Asked whether it was time for her to step-in over school lunches and take over, she said she would not "pre-empt anything at all" and said the issue of taking over the programme was one best addressed to the Prime Minister who "makes decisions like that".
Her answer implied one of the options was for her to take over the programme and that the media should ask Luxon about that - despite the Prime Minister repeatedly saying he was getting regular updates from Seymour on the problems, and was more than comfortable with him fixing the issue.
Luxon seems to think - possibly with the help of some focus grouping - the tide is somewhat turning on school lunches, repeatedly saying parents unhappy with the food being offered should "make a Marmite sandwich and put an apple in a bag".
The power dynamic at play here was an up-and-coming minister, often tipped as a future leader, and an associate who was the third-ranked minister in Cabinet, soon to be second, when he becomes deputy prime minister in May.
Erica Stanford. Photo: RNZ / Reece Baker
The school lunches saga was the second time Stanford publicly questioned Seymour's work in the education portfolio.
On TVNZ's Q+A last month Stanford accused Seymour of "overstepping the mark somewhat" in regards to a crackdown on teacher-only days.
She suggested Seymour had not run the announcement past her before making it.
"I think he knew at the time he was overstepping the mark somewhat because it is my decision - I am the Minister of Education, and when we are rolling out a new curriculum, we have to have curriculum days," she said.
Seymour hit back saying it could be better described as an "overlap", adding that he had always said those were decisions for the minister and that she was the only person who could decide when schools closed.
David Seymour. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
The result of all of these tit-for-tats is Luxon having to front questions on which of his ministers is correct.
In the House on Tuesday afternoon, he made it clear Seymour was the minister responsible for school lunches and Stanford was accountable for teacher-only days.
That was after a series of questions from Labour leader, Chris Hipkins, including, "why is Erica Stanford being left to clean up David Seymour's messes while he fails to show up to meetings with her, and he as Prime Minister won't do anything about it?, and, "was Erica Stanford correct that David Seymour's announcement cancelling teacher-only days overstepped the mark; if so, what has he as Prime Minister done about it?
Chris Hipkins. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
If Luxon wanted someone to blame for those questions, he need look no further than a few seats along his front bench to Stanford.
All the public outburst had achieved was reinforcing the growing perception of dysfunction within the Coalition.
As for when the two ministers might meet again to discuss the issue of school lunches, it seemed unlikely Seymour would be rushing to make room in his diary.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
