Let’s touch on the matter of Grant Robertson defending the Prime Minister.

You know why they rolled out Grant Robertson? Because the Acting Prime Minister is Kelvin Davis, who wouldn’t be rolled out for obvious reasons, so they roll out the slightly more articulate Grant Robertson.

Who then goes and lays it on thick with the old sexist overtones. He said that Simon Bridges is dogwhistling.

To a degree, he is. He is making a political point, that’s what Opposition leaders do, everyone makes a political point.

But in Grant accusing Bridges of being desperate, but by then calling the comments from Bridges sexist, he becomes desperate.

Because they aren’t remotely sexist. The point was very clear, very simple: the Prime Minister is never here.

Yet on this programme, she said she hates leaving the country. She said that comes into criticism when she is away from New Zealand too much.

I asked her that very question when she failed to show on D-Day. She said she couldn’t got Europe because its too far. She couldn’t even go to Wellington, I don’t know why because it wasn’t too far as she was in Nelson talking about her budget.

So on one of the most important days of history in this country, she took no official part whatsoever, her excuse being that she is well aware people don’t like her leaving the country.

What’s she done these last three weeks? Three of the last four weeks she’s been on holiday in Rarotonga, she’s been in Melbourne for a faux, made up speech on governance, and now she’s in Tokelau doing god knows what apart from dancing.

• 'Part-time PM': Bridges attacks Ardern over Tokelau trip
• Bridges accused of 'sexist overtone' after 'part time PM' jab

The only explanation is that they are New Zealanders and they need to see their Prime Minister.

But as Bridges quite rightly pointed out, three weeks recess, why didn’t she go then?

They are all perfectly sensible points, and not one of them is remotely sexist.