Luxon ordered then cancelled tax payer funded Tesla

[Lilith7]

Not really a good look.

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/politi...subsidies/

"National Party leader Christopher Luxon had a fully taxpayer-funded Tesla on order for his use at the same time as he was publicly bashing the Government’s EV policy for subsidising “wealthy Tesla drivers”. The Tesla would have been for Luxon’s use, although he would not have owned it.

The Herald understands Luxon was talked out of ordering the car by horrified staff and at least one senior MP, who believed the purchase would be a massive political risk.
The order was placed last year, shortly before Luxon lashed out at the Government for its clean car discount policy, telling Newshub’s AM Show Labour was taxing people driving utes to help “wealthy Tesla drivers by giving them subsidies”. The Government’s clean car discount, under last year’s settings, took more than $8000 off the price of a Tesla.

“After initially indicating he would take up the offer, Mr Luxon quickly concluded he did not need it and cancelled the order,” he said.

The episode has shone a light on Luxon’s political judgment. Some MPs and staff were aware of the purchase and believed it would be politically damaging for Luxon to be driving a taxpayer-funded Tesla while criticising Government subsidies for Teslas. The episode has led to some raised eyebrows in the National Party at Luxon’s inability to see an obvious political risk.

Luxon already owns a Tesla, which is kept in Auckland."

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Could he please do the same with his booking the PMship after the election? The man is a fool.

[Lilith7]

Could he please do the same with his booking the PMship after the election? The man is a fool.

He does seem to be a bit all over the place, not very consistent & hasn't the least idea of the reality of life for many people here now.

[harm_less]

Luxon's social judgement is totally out of alignment and in need of continual correction by his minders, MPs and strategists. God help us if he succeeds in becoming PM. The country will become a laughing stock on the world stage and the government will turn into a full on shit-show.

[Lilith7]

Luxon's social judgement is totally out of alignment and in need of continual correction by his minders, MPs and strategists. God help us if he succeeds in becoming PM. The country will become a laughing stock on the world stage and the government will turn into a full on shit-show.

And if they have to partner with ACT, then I dread to think what might happen - so very out of touch are ACT that they've already stated they intend to 'trim' benefits. 
They just haven't the least idea.

[harm_less]

And the lastest BS out of this pillock's gob: https://twitter.com/i/status/1669228210855510018

[Oh_hunnihunni]

It is their two facedness that gets me. Always happy to profit from someone else's cutbacks, never willing to make their own. Mealie mouthed platitudes about homelessness while owning several properties...

[Lilith7]

And the lastest BS out of this pillock's gob: https://twitter.com/i/status/1669228210855510018

I do seem to be getting somewhat radical as I get older - I think it should be required that anyone wanting to become a politician should:

1) Immediately relinquish any properties apart from one house which is where they actually live when not in Wellington (those from outside Wellington can be provided with a very modest Kainga Ora house to live in at a reasonable rent, while in parliament) & one other [property which is a bach/holiday home. And I don't mean transfer to to family/friends, or somehow 'hide' it.

2) They also should imo be required to live on the same amount as the lowest benefit/wage for at least 3 months each year (over winter) so that they remain in touch with the reality of life for many of those they claim to represent.


3) Perhaps they should also be required to work at a less desirable part time job for a few hours each month - cleaning seems an excellent idea, & should ensure they remain very down to earth.

I'm not altogether sure whether or not I'm serious about these - but it certainly wouldn't do that lot in the beehive any harm if we insisted they abide by these conditions; once it had been run past a group of lawyers to make quite sure there were no loopholes for them to slime their way out of anything...

---

It is their two facedness that gets  me. Always happy to profit from someone else's cutbacks, never willing to make their own. Mealie mouthed platitudes about homelessness while owning several properties...

They should be legally required to list properties very publicly at the time they enter politics, with six monthly updates.

[Wainuiguy]

And the lastest BS out of this pillock's gob: https://twitter.com/i/status/1669228210855510018

I do seem to be getting somewhat radical as I get older - I think it should be required that anyone wanting to become a politician should:

1) Immediately relinquish any properties apart from one house which is where they actually live when not in Wellington (those from outside Wellington can be provided with a very modest Kainga Ora house to live in at a reasonable rent, while in parliament) & one other [property which is a bach/holiday home. And I don't mean transfer to to family/friends, or somehow 'hide' it.

2) They also should imo be required to live on the same amount as the lowest benefit/wage for at least 3 months each year (over winter) so that they remain in touch with the reality of life for many of those they claim to represent.


3) Perhaps they should also be required to work at a less desirable part time job for a few hours each month - cleaning seems an excellent idea, & should ensure they remain very down to earth.

I'm not altogether sure whether or not I'm serious about these - but it certainly wouldn't do that lot in the beehive any harm if we insisted they abide by these conditions; once it had been run past a group of lawyers to make quite sure there were no loopholes for them to slime their way out of anything...

---

It is their two facedness that gets  me. Always happy to profit from someone else's cutbacks, never willing to make their own. Mealie mouthed platitudes about homelessness while owning several properties...

They should be legally required to list properties very publicly at the time they enter politics, with six monthly updates.

They are - they have to provide a list of all assets to Parliamentary Services every year.  This is how Wood's shot himself in the foot.

And in relation to the Tesla story - you do realise it was Parliamentary Services who offered the Tesla and it would have been them to claim the rebate not Luxon?  Personally what he did wrong was to cancel it.  It would have highlighted the hypocrisy in the rebate scheme which only benefited mainly wealthy people.  But those rebates that did benefit more middle income people have now been removed.

[Lilith7]

I do seem to be getting somewhat radical as I get older - I think it should be required that anyone wanting to become a politician should:

1) Immediately relinquish any properties apart from one house which is where they actually live when not in Wellington (those from outside Wellington can be provided with a very modest Kainga Ora house to live in at a reasonable rent, while in parliament) & one other [property which is a bach/holiday home. And I don't mean transfer to to family/friends, or somehow 'hide' it.

2) They also should imo be required to live on the same amount as the lowest benefit/wage for at least 3 months each year (over winter) so that they remain in touch with the reality of life for many of those they claim to represent.


3) Perhaps they should also be required to work at a less desirable part time job for a few hours each month - cleaning seems an excellent idea, & should ensure they remain very down to earth.

I'm not altogether sure whether or not I'm serious about these - but it certainly wouldn't do that lot in the beehive any harm if we insisted they abide by these conditions; once it had been run past a group of lawyers to make quite sure there were no loopholes for them to slime their way out of anything...

---

They should be legally required to list properties very publicly at the time they enter politics, with six monthly updates.

They are - they have to provide a list of all assets to Parliamentary Services every year.  This is how Wood's shot himself in the foot.

And in relation to the Tesla story - you do realise it was Parliamentary Services who offered the Tesla and it would have been them to claim the rebate not Luxon?  Personally what he did wrong was to cancel it.  It would have highlighted the hypocrisy in the rebate scheme which only benefited mainly wealthy people.  But those rebates that did benefit more middle income people have now been removed.

Then "every year" is clearly inadequate. We need far more openness from &  about all our politicians.

[Wainuiguy]

They are - they have to provide a list of all assets to Parliamentary Services every year.  This is how Wood's shot himself in the foot.

And in relation to the Tesla story - you do realise it was Parliamentary Services who offered the Tesla and it would have been them to claim the rebate not Luxon?  Personally what he did wrong was to cancel it.  It would have highlighted the hypocrisy in the rebate scheme which only benefited mainly wealthy people.  But those rebates that did benefit more middle income people have now been removed.

Then "every year" is clearly inadequate. We need far more openness from &  about all our politicians.

I think every year is perfectly adequate.   How often  would you like your MP updating their details- weekly?

[Lilith7]

Then "every year" is clearly inadequate. We need far more openness from &  about all our politicians.

I think every year is perfectly adequate.   How often  would you like your MP updating their details- weekly?

Every three months might be reasonable; they're politicians after all.

[Wainuiguy]

I think every year is perfectly adequate.   How often  would you like your MP updating their details- weekly?

Every three months might be reasonable; they're politicians after all.

What a complete and utter waste of time.  How much would something change in 3 months?  12 monthly is perfectly fine   seems that it is only idiot Labour ministers who have issues

[R2x1]

[
I think every year is perfectly adequate.   How often  would you like your MP updating their details- weekly?

Given that the intent of many aspiring politicians is to "up-date" their constituents at least weekly, would not a reciting of their score card every Monday seem quite a moderate aspiration?

---

What a complete and utter waste of time.  How much would something change in 3 months?  12 monthly is perfectly fine  . . .

You obviously haven't looked at your grocery bill a lot of late.             (Would that be on the advice of your grocer?)  

[Lilith7]

Every three months might be reasonable; they're politicians after all.

What a complete and utter waste of time.  How much would something change in 3 months?  12 monthly is perfectly fine   seems that it is only idiot Labour ministers who have issues

Once again; these are politicians.

---

[
I think every year is perfectly adequate.   How often  would you like your MP updating their details- weekly?

Given that the intent of many aspiring politicians is to "up-date" their constituents at least weekly, would not a reciting of their score card every Monday seem quite a moderate aspiration?

---

What a complete and utter waste of time.  How much would something change in 3 months?  12 monthly is perfectly fine  . . .

You obviously haven't looked at your grocery bill a lot of late.             (Would that be on the advice of your grocer?)  

[Wainuiguy]

What a complete and utter waste of time.  How much would something change in 3 months?  12 monthly is perfectly fine   seems that it is only idiot Labour ministers who have issues

Once again; these are politicians.

---

Given that the intent of many aspiring politicians is to "up-date" their constituents at least weekly, would not a reciting of their score card every Monday seem quite a moderate aspiration?

---

You obviously haven't looked at your grocery bill a lot of late.             (Would that be on the advice of your grocer?)  

Food needs to be bought.   And I am happy to say I am in a position where I can buy without too much concern.

But your analogy is a stupid one.