Police Minister Poto Williams is becoming a liability for the Ardern government, one of several poorly performing ministers (think of David Clark, Kris Faafoi, Phil Twyford).
Williams displayed her quality as Police Minister once more in Parliament this week as she faced questions on law and order. Not surprisingly her performance (or lack of it) is beginning to attract media attention— although those in line for government handouts tend to steer clear of anything that smacks of a sacking.
This is how Hansard recorded her latest exchange, during which most government MPs kept their heads well down.
Hon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa) to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by her statement, “I reject the premise that gang tensions have increased under this Government’s watch”; if so, how does she reconcile that with reported police intelligence, which states parts of the country have experienced unprecedented levels of gang violence in the past year?
Hon POTO WILLIAMS (Minister of Police): I stand by the full context of all of my answers at question time. In answer to the member’s second question, gangs have been a feature of New Zealand society for well over half a century. What police intelligence shows us is that the arrival of the 501s in 2015 has fundamentally changed the nature of gangs, making them much more overt and sophisticated. This was responded to at the time by cutting police numbers. That’s why, since 2017, we have funded the largest increase in organised crime staff, deployed 1,400 more cops across the country, and introduced legislation to give police more tools to address gang violence.
Hon Mark Mitchell: Why do gangs have more guns under her watch?
Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I would like the member to quantify that for me please.
Mitchell raised a point of order. He said he thought it was the Opposition’s chance to ask the Government Ministers questions, not the other way round.
The Speaker said he should have disallowed the question. An MP can’t just use an unsubstantiated statement as Mitchell had done.
Mitchell took a different tack, asking if Williams agreed with Detective Superintendent Greg Williams, “Gangs have always had guns but that is increasing and we’re seeing a greater propensity to use them.”?
Hon POTO WILLIAMS: As I’ve said many times, gangs have been a feature of New Zealand society and that’s why as a Government we have responded by funding more than 700 more organised crime staff, and that’s why we deploy tactical response units, and that’s why we’ve introduced legislation to give police more powers to tackle gun crime.
Mitchell raised another point of order, saying he had asked a very direct question, to establish whether the Minister agreed with the quote from Detective Superintendent Greg Williams who is in charge of the national organised crime unit in this country.
The Speaker said he thought the Minister not only agreed but added far too much to the answer.
Hon Mark Mitchell: So if the Minister agrees with Detective Superintendent Greg Williams’ quote, why do gangs have more guns under her watch?
It then became apparent the Minister did not necessarily agree
Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I just want to confirm for that member what I actually said, which was “gangs have been a feature of New Zealand society for well over half a century”. That’s why we have responded by funding 700 more organised crime staff, that’s why we’ve deployed tactical response units, and that’s why we have introduced legislation to give police more powers to tackle gun crime.
Another point of order was inevitable:
Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. In my last point of order you indicated to me that the Minister had indicated that she agreed with Detective Superintendent Greg Williams’ quote, and in his quote he said that firearms have increased—that gangs have got more firearms. I then went back to the Minister and asked her, based on her response to that, and she’s now refusing to answer the question.
SPEAKER: No, she didn’t refuse to answer the question at all. Does the member have a further supplementary?
Let’s try another question.
Hon Mark Mitchell: Why do gangs have more guns under her watch?
Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I would like that member to provide evidence to that fact—authenticate your question.
Even the effort at shielding by the Speaker couldn’t help the hapless Williams.
The NZ Herald’s Audrey Young offered her take in a subsequent commentary headed “Ardern must be weighing calling Williams back from police beat”.
She noted
“… it was a gamble when Ardern put Williams in at the start of the second term, but not due to inexperience”.
Young explained that the gamble was because Williams was not a natural fit for the police portfolio, to which naturally hard-line law-and-order types are usually appointed.
“Ardern possibly thought it was a portfolio that did not require much political skill…b ut she did not foresee the dramatic change in criminal offending and the political flashpoint the portfolio has become where gang shootings in broad daylight and aggravated robberies have become commonplace.
“The political reality requires a rethink.
“Williams usually does okay in the first question on notice, and gives an adequately scripted reply. But after that, there is a sense of trepidation about well she will go without notes”
Young does not relate who feels that sense of trepidation, but says Williams then turns in a “faltering performance.”
That is being very kind.
Young notes that National has been targeting Williams as a weak minister, “despite the occasional suggestion from the Speaker that it could be seen as sexist or racist”.
The conclusion Young reaches is that the role needs a proven performer.
“For an issue that will be so potent in election year, Williams’ staying would be a big risk for Ardern, and she is almost certainly considering the alternatives”.
But to sack Williams would be to admit it was a mistake to appoint her to the role in the first place.
And admitting mistakes doesn’t come easily to the PM.
Point of Order 