This week, he instinctively criticised parents, saying those concerned about the new food-in-schools programme should just "make a Marmite sandwich and put an apple in a bag".
In reality, it has been schools, principals and teachers who have been the most vocal about the poor quality of school food under the new, underfunded scheme.
At a time when the prime minister repeatedly claims the cost of living is the most important issue for New Zealanders, it beggars belief that he defends the ransacking of children’s school lunches while blaming parents instead.
The prime minister ought to reflect on the fact principals and teachers support the programme — not just for equity reasons, but because a well-run scheme also enhances teaching and learning outcomes.
The school lunch programme was designed to achieve multiple goals, as all good public policies and spending should.
Maybe they come from a struggling family that couldn’t afford lunches that week after paying the power bill. Maybe they just forgot their lunch that day.
Whatever the reason, we feed hungry kids at school so they can learn well all day.
That is a crucial reason why the programme exists.
We also feed kids at school because eating together fosters connection, consideration and community.
Ensuring there is enough food for everyone means no-one is left out, and no-one is singled out as poor or needy.
Social cohesion is a vital part of the school experience and helps develop empathetic and resilient young people and adults.
Feeding kids at school also benefits the economy. Many cafes, shops and new businesses built strong relationships with their school communities by providing school lunches.
Sometimes, it was the local cafe employing more staff to prepare lunches.
Other times, it was chefs, kitchen hands and gardeners — either employed or volunteering — growing food and preparing meals on school grounds.
They were teaching kids about the science of healthy food and healthy bodies while feeding them well.
The food-in-schools programme was, until the government gutted it, a successful initiative that aligned with its own education goals — improving children’s health, learning capacity, behaviour and school attendance.
Now the new, poorly designed scheme has proven to be a dismal failure, the prime minister has an opportunity to step up.
He can protect the educational gains made under the previous programme, address the ongoing cost-of-living struggles faced by families, build quality relationships with schools, principals and teachers and leave a legacy of healthier, happier and better-educated children.
Rather than asking David Seymour, the very person who dismantled the system, to fix it (why would he, when he’s already achieved his fiscal savings target?), Mr Luxon could be the one to step in and be heroic. For our kids.
I suspect Christopher Luxon’s lasting reputation in New Zealand politics will be as the PM who did the least possible — the PM who took his hands off the steering wheel and shrugged as things fell apart.
In many areas, that approach might be less damaging and more easily reversed by future governments. But not in this case.
For the three years this government will be in power, a child will lose three years of good food, social connection and better learning at school.
That is enough time to set a child back years in their educational development, to develop a deep mistrust of state agencies that make unreliable promises (such as providing food that might burn you), to struggle with learning and achieving school milestones and to internalise the idea that their government and community will discount them at every opportunity.
That’s enough time to cause real, lasting harm.
At some point, the prime minister has to show leadership.
He needs to stop blaming the coalition agreements he negotiated and stand up for at least some part of this community.
But, if he isn’t going to stand up for hungry kids who just want to learn, he won’t stand up for anyone.
■Metiria Stanton Turei is a senior law lecturer at the University of Otago and a former Green Party MP and co-leader.
