Yesterday TV3’s new current affairs show The Nation interviewed Steven Joyce. I responded here.
Joyce is being described as the Minister for everything. He’s capable, smooth, doesn’t get flustered and appears to be results driven. No doubt he has a whole bunch of other qualities that have led him to his current many roles. I respect those qualities.
I think he has too many portfolios. In order to do really well you have to focus on a few things and not take on too many. I won’t dwell on that now, but his lack of ability to grasp some of the big issues in the Communications portfolio (other than broadband, mobile termination rates and spectrum) is starting to show.
What fascinates me though, is what lies at the core. I’ve been trying to work out for a while now what drives Steven Joyce.
Does he have a core set of beliefs about truly making a difference that link to a bigger plan (about NZ)?
Or is it about delivering competently on stated objectives, for the ultimate goal of winning the next election and staying in power?
In his interview with Duncan Garner yesterday (replayed today) Joyce said two things that seem to contradict each other.
(To read the full transcript go here)
DUNCAN: I mean Phil Goff and the Labour Party attacked you this week and they quoted Groucho Marx saying ‘of you these are my principles and if you don’t like them I have others’. I mean that’s the argument about you that you don’t stand for anything except the popularity in the polls.
STEVEN: Oh I don’t think that’s fair, I mean I’ve got some pretty – you know some views of my own which are built from my background and from my family background, my father was a small businessman and I started out as a small businessman, and we grew it a bit, but those things have always been in my background but at the same time politics is about actually what people want you to do, and what people are prepared to accept.
And another one:
DUNCAN: But as Deborah Hill Cone pointed out in the panel earlier, you have an option here, as Chris Barton also pointed out in the Herald, you can either be Minister with some metal, or a spineless jellyfish, which one are you going to be?
STEVEN: I think as I’ve said in the Herald myself, I get the 360 degrees advice, Chris has in the Herald mentioned the spineless jellyfish, I’m certain that all over there’s advice in terms of which way it should go, but it won’t just be about being popular, it’ll be about making the right decision for the industry and for New Zealand.
Now I realise that politics requires tough calls. But what really drives Steven Joyce? Being popular and doing what people want (or think they want), or making the right decisions for New Zealand?
Sometimes it can be both. But there’s many many occasions now where I’ve watched Joyce close down an issue (within hours) because it’s obviously not popular.
Is there anything substantive at the core? Or is it sheer pragmatism?
What drives Steven Joyce? Clearly not public transport.
Read Machiavelli’s “The Prince” and you might have an idea.
@ ToCat. Read The Prince at University, and since. Intriguing and useful. But soul-less. Rest my case.
He’s pragmatic: he is straight up about the nature of politics – that is, he doesn’t pretend it is anything other than ensuring the voter’s PERCEIVE the government has their best interests at heart, as opposed to actually working to protect those interests. I would much rather have an MP that says they are not interested in listening to us than an MP would pretends that they are but don’t.
Rebecca. Why are your expectations so low? Your comment cuts to the heart of what is wrong with politics.
He’s worse than pragmatic he is self serving. Clues abound everywhere, it may be semantics, but these guys are well drilled in what to respond and how…
“for the industry and for New Zealand” I have little doubthe means in that order.
Funny.. I have always considered being pragmatic a good characteristic.
adjective
dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations : a pragmatic approach to politics.
That was my minimum impression when watching it. I also thought it sounded like “and for New Zealand” was tacked on as an after thought as if he suddenly remembered that he was supposed to say that as well.
@ Pedrovsky
Well, if that’s the dictionary definition then National can’t possibly be pragmatic as they don’t believe in reality. Their stubborn insistence on National Standards when all the evidence is that it will make things worse is proof of that.
‘Disinterested’, he said.
Chilling.
Whats your point?
You want him to stick his principles and not change them even if they’re wrong?
It seems to me that in this world there are some things that need to be done no matter the consequences and there are other things that you can be flexible on, he seems to be acknowledging this.
I, for one, think this is a good thing. I like the fact that this govt is prepard to say “we were wrong”, “the people don’t want this” etc etc
But what really drives Steven Joyce?
My theory is that Joyce is a conservative politician in the classic, Burkean sense of the term:
Politicians are a fairly vain bunch, and temperamentally disposed towards policies of large-scale radical reforms (think Tolley and her National Standards). So it’s quite nice to see a Minister like Steven Joyce looking around at his portfolios and finding numerous small-scale examples of government policies or progames that make no sense. ‘Why do we give student loans to people who repeatedly fail their courses?’ ‘Why do we let teenagers drink and drive?’ ‘Why does such a small country have six thousand taxpayer funded qualifications?’
Political conservatism is now associated with radicalism, theocracy and turning the clock back to the 1950s (or the 1890s). But it used to be about that very style of government – intelligent reform of existing institutions. If it seems hard to recognise it’s probably because New Zealand hasn’t had a conservative government since the 1960s.
Clare my expectations of what to expect from our government dropped when under Labour I realised that my idealism would never be able to co-exist with what was good for our family & community at large by way of: tax & ACC policies; allowing child abuse to continue to fly under the radar; seeing our own high schools in Upper Hutt deteriorate due to a 5 year long funding freeze; seeing our health system get worse, not better – despite massive investment; massive increases in Road User Charges…the list goes on!
Now I wonder whether anyone is capable of retaining the integrity that first led them to politics. Everyone in politics seems so institutionalised and caught up in this ‘us vs them’ mentality where the loser is always the voter.
I am tired of all the talk about MPs planning on doing what is right for the “ordinary hard-working New Zealander”, the “Mums & Dads” of society and the “many not the few” as each time we – the ordinary hard-working Mum & Dad New Zealanders, seem to get overlooked.
Broken link Danyl.
Danyl
Interesting that Joyce wants to stop those who fail getting loans. He failed in 3 different study areas, totally state funded, before realising where his rue interest and passion lie.
Students, on the whole, are YOUNG, they dont always know what they want to do or whether an area is good for them or not.
I studied law for 5 years, graduated, practised for 4 years then left the profession. Through the back door I am about to return some 17 years later. Ok, I passed my papers, but I barely practised in the area I chose. IT turned out I didnt like it.
We ought NOT dissuade young people from testing the waters, even at our own expense.
Serial time wasters are not the same as failure sin a particular year. It is possible to fail the same course 2 or 3 times, while passing the rest because something doesn’t click for you.
Petrovsky
“based on practical rather than theoretical considerations : a pragmatic approach to politics”
It’s just that the ‘practical’ here means getting re-elected and keeping my job above all else.
$2.4 bill Holiday Highway and $2.2 bill Transmission Gully Rd when we are running out of cheap sources of oil. Thats neither small scale nor intelligent.
Very popularist for holiday makers however.
Rebecca
” the ordinary hard-working Mum & Dad New Zealanders, seem to get overlooked.”
Funny cos the most overlooked group in my view is the married with no children or single (over 35) with no children… Tend to be high income earners who pay a large percentage of their earnings for other people’s children. I can completely see the benefit to society that we do so, of course. I’m not as certain as you that an “ordinary” NZer even exists outside our own perspectives.
He is a pragmatist, hell on Saturday he even started talking about how he needs to build the ridiculous motorways first to get the economy moving then other stuff afterwards…
It is like he has finally realised that the public wants better transport choices so he’ll dangle the carrrot out there…
I think he misunderstands what is meant by get the economy moving
Tracey I agree, but one’s perception is one’s reality and the reality for our family is that National’s policies suit us better than Labour’s ever did. :p
Agreed, you pursue your reality others theirs, of course, so do politicians and parties
Haha that they do!
Interesting that Joyce wants to stop those who fail getting loans. He failed in 3 different study areas, totally state funded, before realising where his rue interest and passion lie.
Isn’t that an awesomely compelling argument in favor of restricting loans? How did it benefit Joyce – or the taxpayer – to have a degree in Zoology that he never used?
Does Joyce know about this from Kiwirail? He must be livid.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10633470
Danyl, nice cut and paste, the answer to your question is partially contained in the rest of my post which you copied from.
Of course he didnt have such a degree… Benefitting society is more than a tangible “I studied building now I can build”. BTW ask leaky buildingowners if THAT follows. We and out contributions to society are the sum total of our experiences including study, failed or not.
Be careful what you wish for Danyl you might just get it.
“The start of the procurement process was welcomed by Auckland Regional Council chairman Mike Lee, despite what he said was a 15-month delay caused by the Government’s intervention in the electrification project.
He noted that the Auckland Regional Transport Authority had already drawn up a short-list of suppliers, and was preparing to call for supply bids in May last year, before the Government decided to block a regional fuel tax designed to pay for the trains and instead to put KiwiRail in the driver’s seat.”
Danyl, interesting analysis except for the fact that in promoting the “holiday highway” Joyce really seems to be building himself a huge vain monument. While there certainly are problems along the Puhoi-Wellsford road, they could pretty much all be solved through fairly minor measures: like bypassing Warkworth and doing safety upgrades.
Yet Joyce wants to build a 35km motorway.
So I’m sorry but I don’t buy the argument that he’s into small-scale intelligent reforms only.
At least Steven Joyce can hold a discussion which is lot more than Tolley can do. He is refreshing in that he at least sounds as if he knows what he is talking about.
I agree with Rebecca that National’s policies suit my family much better than Labour’s , not that I have ever voted for either party.
Several labour politicans let themselves and their party down by their rude , abusive responses to people writing on Red Alert. Perhaps this is the way people respond in parliament but it is not how people usually respond to one another..it is a very odd way to respond if you are actually wanting to win hearts and minds. If this keeps up , I predict that Labour will be in the wilderness for awhile.
“but at the same time politics is about actually what people want you to do, and what people are prepared to accept.”
…” it won’t just be about being popular, it’ll be about making the right decision for the industry and for New Zealand.”
It means the same thing. Joyce will manipulate people as required. Like Auckland supercity, people’s apathy is paramount to his plan. His major focus is on greed.
If you people don’t saturate New Zealand with your message, as well as on the blogs, you’re going to get nowhere, come 2011. This government has financial backing far beyond what you can drum up in New Zealand (Helen Clark knew that back in 2005/8) and whatever you do, don’t settle for a Roger Douglas type with cash and rightwing philosophy to get you through. Use the good stuff you have, people stuff. They’re your real treasure. National,Act,United Future and not even the twofaced corporate Maori party have that.
Clare, I ask again, what would you do in regards to Telecom? In your “reply” on Scoop, you complain that “Telecom has obligations to Kiwis under the Telecommunications Service Obligations to provide free local landline calls, the 111 service and the ability to connect to the internet.
“While the Government will no doubt continue to ensure those obligations are met, Steven Joyce has revealed he has no regard for the future of the company which provides them. ”
Why should he? And what exactly is he supposed to do about? Perhaps use taxpayers money to prop up a failing company? No, his only interest in that regard, is that if Telecom can’t provide the services that they are contracted to provide, then he finds someone else who can. Outside of that, as a private company, they’re on their own.