Source: New Zealand Police
Diversions are in place following a serious crash near the intersection of Hamurana Road and Tauranga Direct Road this morning.
The crash, involving a truck and car, was reported to Police at 9.15am.
One person is reported to have sustained critical injuries, and one person has serious injuries.
The road is partially blocked and motorists are asked to follow the directions of emergency services staff.
ENDS
Issued by Police Media Centre.
Source: Reserve Bank of New Zealand
RBNZ stats alert: 14 May 2025 – Kia ora koutou, On 21 May 2025 we will be launching the Tara-ā-Umanga Business Expectations Survey (BES), publishing results for the June quarter. Publication will be in advance of the 28 May Monetary Policy Statement, in line with the timing of our other expectations surveys.
We would like to thank all the businesses that have made the development and launch of the new Tara-ā-Umanga Business Expectations Survey possible and enabled us to build a representative sample survey of New Zealand businesses.
This new survey includes several hundred businesses from different sectors around the country, from small to large firms. It is separate from the existing Survey of Expectations focusing on expert forecasters and economists, and industry leaders (Table M14, from 1987 onwards), which will continue.
Business Expectations Survey publication on 21 May, after 3pm
The launch of BES marks the beginning of the regular quarterly publication of the survey and the conclusion of a successful development phase that involved public consultation and pilots to build the sample and test content and methodology. The launch will feature a new web table with population estimates of economy-wide expectations:
M15 Business Expectations Survey
The sample size and design enable new breakdowns by business size and industry, which will be published in the data file accompanying Table M15. The initial publication will include our Stats Insight, a background note as a guide to interpret the new survey results, and a description of our survey methodology.
It should be noted that while this survey represents a significant uplift in our expectations data, more observations are needed (beyond the short historical timeseries that will be available at launch) to enable us to estimate the relationship between these data and ultimate inflation outcomes. We anticipate that the results of this survey will become key statistical series used by central banks, researchers, financial institutions and commentators.
Background information
Inflation expectations are important because households and businesses reflect their expectations in their price- and wage-setting decisions. Improving the quality of our expectation surveys is part of the wider response to our 2022 review of how we formulate and implement our monetary policy. In this review, we identified several areas where better data could support high quality monetary policy decision-making.
For further information please see: Tara-ā-Umanga Business Expectations Survey: Survey design and development: https://govt.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=bd316aa7ee4f5679c56377819&id=b66e552e95&e=f3c68946f8
RBNZ’s existing expectations surveys:
Survey of expectations (M14): https://govt.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=bd316aa7ee4f5679c56377819&id=16ac7517ae&e=f3c68946f8
Household inflation expectations (H1): https://govt.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=bd316aa7ee4f5679c56377819&id=da9067ab97&e=f3c68946f8
Additional wholesale interest rate data now being published
From 12 May 2025, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand – Te Pūtea Matua began publishing two new daily series on Table B2, making more data available on wholesale interest rates that apply to large institutions in New Zealand markets.
The new daily series on Table B2 are:
Overnight Deposit Rate: the rate of remuneration ESAS account holders receive for funds that are held overnight in their account at the Reserve Bank of New Zealand – Te Pūtea Matua. For further information please see: What is ESAS
Overnight Reverse Repo Rate: the rate that is charged to borrow funds lent overnight via the Reserve Bank’s Overnight Reverse Repo Facility (ORRF). For further information on the key standing facilities provided to market participants, including the ORRF, please see: Facilities at a glance – Reserve Bank of New Zealand – Te Pūtea Matua
This data will add to the wide range of information that is available to support the analysis of the New Zealand financial system and understanding the transmission of monetary policy through wholesale interest rates quoted in New Zealand markets.
Source: Secondary teachers question rationale for changes to relationship education guidelines
Watercare has completed a $2m project to ultimately increase the capacity of the water network in Pukekohe and Buckland.
Over the past two months crews installed two new bulk supply points on Pukekohe East Road which will allow more water to be distributed through the network, supporting current and future growth in Pukekohe and Buckland.
The bulk supply points will allow Watercare to manage the flows, regulate pressure in the network and test the quality of the water.
Although both bulk supply points are complete, only one will be brought into service once the rest of the infrastructure is installed, says Watercare project manager Veluppillai Thavarajah.
Watercare project manager Veluppillai Thavarajah.
“Once the infrastructure is ready, we’ll bring one of the bulk supply points into service to supply water to around 1500 houses planned for construction in the area.
“To connect the bulk supply points to the existing network, Watercare is planning to undertake connection works in early June. This will involve a temporary shutdown of the large water main supplying Pukekohe.
“It will take our team about 16 hours to carry out this work, but all our customers will continue to have water because the team will ensure that the reservoir suppling the area will have enough water storage for the duration of the work.
“The other bulk supply point will be brought into service at a later date when it’s needed to supply water to future developments.”
Thavarajah says Watercare opted to install both bulk supply points at the same time to reduce costs and disruptions.
“We appreciate people’s patience with us as our crews worked to install pipework, valves and fittings needed to bring these bulk supply points to fruition.”
Franklin ward councillor Andy Baker says it’s great to see Watercare stepping up to support growth in the area.
“The new bulk supply points get things moving for early development, and with plans in place for extra infrastructure, it shows Watercare is serious about enabling growth in the area.”
Source: Secondary teachers question rationale for changes to relationship education guidelines
Auckland Council is aware that pieces of asbestos-containing material (ACM) have been washing up along Auckland’s eastern coastline. While the risk posed to the public is low, the council is taking all necessary precautions and removing the material from affected beaches.
The largest amounts of ACM have been found at Glendowie Bay and, to a lesser extent, neighbouring Karaka Bay. Very small amounts have also been found further up the Tāmaki River towards Panmure.
Signage is in place at Glendowie and Karaka Bay and the council has conducted several clean-ups to remove the material from these beaches.
Manager of Licensing & Environmental Health, Mervyn Chetty, says there is no need for the public to avoid beaches where ACM is present, but if material is spotted it should be left undisturbed and reported to healthenforcement@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz or by phoning 09 301 0101.
“We are asking people to take a common-sense approach and to simply leave ACM alone for the council to collect. Dogs and children should also be prevented from picking up the material,” he says.
Health risk low
The recent washed-up pieces of ACM are 5-10cm pieces of fibre cement board, likely to be from historic construction waste. Asbestos in this form is considered non-friable, meaning it cannot be broken up and inhaled under normal circumstances.
Health New Zealand Medical Officer of Health, Dr David Sinclair, says the riskiest situation is where dust is being generated from Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM) being cut or damaged.
“In outdoor settings such as the affected beaches, we’d expect the level of asbestos dust to be minimal, especially when the material is below the high tide mark and damp. However, people should inform Auckland Council if they find ACM so it can be removed, and not disturb the ACM pieces or collect them.”
Further health advice on asbestos containing materials is available at: info.health.nz/asbestos-and-your-health
Source still a mystery
Pinpointing the source of ACM material is difficult, says Mervyn Chetty, especially given the likely age of the material and ability for it to have moved over time.
“Unfortunately, waste disposal practices were not always what they are today. The ACM we’re finding now is likely to be decades-old construction waste that was dumped near the shoreline, which over time has fragmented and dispersed along beaches due to natural processes like tides and weather.”
The council has not identified a likely single source of the material but is continuing to conduct investigations. If any members of the public have information that would assist, they are encouraged to report this to healthenforcement@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz.
In addition to responding to reports of ACM, the council will continue to inspect and monitor beaches in the area to determine the scale of the issue. Regular clean-ups will be carried out and signage erected at sites where pieces of ACM are more commonly being found.
While it is likely that these fragments are historic deposits, it is also a good reminder to Aucklanders to responsibly secure and dispose of construction and household waste, as these can end up making their way to waterways and beaches, particularly following storm events.
We thank the community for their cooperation as we work to manage this issue responsibly.
For further updates, check back here on OurAuckland.
Asbestos FAQs
What is asbestos?
Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral made up of fine, durable fibres. It was widely used in construction materials in New Zealand between the 1940s and mid-1980s due to its fire resistance, insulation properties, and strength. It was phased out in construction materials during the late 1980s and banned completely from importation in 2016.
What is the difference between asbestos and ACM?
Asbestos refers to the mineral itself, while ACM stands for asbestos-containing Material, which means any material or product that contains more than 1 per cent asbestos. For example, insulation boards, vinyl flooring, or roofing tiles may be ACMs as they contain asbestos mixed with other materials.
Is all asbestos or ACM dangerous?
Asbestos is considered a health hazard when it is “friable”. That means that it can easily be broken up or crumbled by hand when dry, and the fibres can therefore be inhaled into the lungs. Generally, ACM is non-friable as it is mixed with other hard materials like cement or resin, making it more stable.
Most asbestos found in construction materials in New Zealand is in the less hazardous ACM form, however pure asbestos may be found in places like pipe insulation or sprayed-on ceiling coatings. Even in this form, the material would only become hazardous if broken up or damaged.
What are the health risks associated with asbestos?
Inhaling significant amounts of airborne asbestos can lead to respiratory problems, including lung cancer, with greater levels of exposure over longer periods of time leading to increased risk. Those most likely to be affected are people who work regularly with asbestos or are exposed to it during construction, renovation, or demolition work.
More information
Visit info.health.nz for health advice on ACM
Visit WorkSafe for information about asbestos in the home and safe removal practices.
Source:
Download a PDF version of our Response Framework for Educational Delivery and Performance (PDF 191 KB)
What is our Response Framework?
The Response Framework describes how we manage educational delivery and performance where it needs to improve. It provides an overview of the types of responses the TEC uses to manage delivery and performance, and broad factors that affect whether a response is taken and what type of response.
The framework is designed to endure over time, so it focuses on responses and factors that will not change over multiple funding rounds. It does not include specific expectations of delivery and performance (eg, specific levels or measures of these factors, rankings of their importance, or mappings between factors and responses) because these vary over time and in different contexts.
Instead, specific expectations are laid out in a range of regularly published sources including Plan Guidance, funding conditions, funding mechanisms and technical guidance. Tertiary education organisations (TEOs) should refer to these sources to understand what specific levels and/or circumstances are likely to evoke a response.
Decisions about responses to delivery and performance result from on-balance assessments, not bright-line tests
Decisions involve many factors and depend on us having as much information as possible. For this reason, we rely on engagement as the first response when an indicator occurs, to enable a “no surprises” approach if a further response is required. We aim to understand the reasons underlying the indicator and what is already happening to address it.
The Response Framework covers how we respond to educational delivery and/or performance that needs to improve. It does not cover:
responses to delivery or performance that exceeds expectations
other types of assessments we make such as tertiary education institution (TEI) risk and private training establishment (PTE) financial viability
other types of decisions we make, such as those about investment (although both our investment and response frameworks are relevant where responses relate to funding, such as reducing investment when performance is not improving).
Fundamental to our decision-making are our legislative functions and obligations under the Education and Training Act 2020, including giving effect to the Tertiary Education Strategy. An ongoing focus on learner success is embedded throughout the framework: as a potential indicator that improvement is necessary, a way to improve outcomes, a contextual factor considered in decisions, and a principle underpinning all decisions.
We use three broad types of responses
This list is not exhaustive.
Information, monitoring and engagement
Our business-as-usual methods for understanding provider performance include regular data reporting and communicating expectations through Plan Guidance, other publications and engagement.
Our first choice of response, when a need to improve outcomes is indicated, may include requesting further information, or changing the frequency, intensity, method, attendees or content of engagements.
Dedicated and/or specialist engagement (eg, a Relationship Manager) is likely when there is more risk (eg, total funding envelope >$5m), or delivery or performance needs to improve.
Requirements and conditions
When more structure is required than engagement alone, TEC may:
require a full Investment Plan
change the Plan length
require a significant Plan amendment
require an improvement plan
apply organisation-specific funding conditions
impose a new condition on subsequent Plan funding approval.
Funding
In situations where performance is not improving even with requirements or conditions, TEC may:
remove access to additional funding
revoke approval for a qualification to be accessible for student loans and allowances
amend, revoke and/or recover existing funding
reduce further investment or part-fund only (including signalling this through indicative allocations)
cease investment.
Proposed funding decisions made as part of annual Plan rounds are always subject to a Right of Response process.
We consider many factors in making a response decision
We generally (although not always) use responses in a graduated manner, with engagement continuing throughout.
Context
Context is crucial to which responses we use, how quickly we do so, and the importance of various indicators and mitigations at different points in time. For example:
at a system level: fiscal environment, overall availability of funding and government risk appetite can affect how quickly we strengthen responses or which ones we apply
at a sub-sector level: the type of provider, including size, legislated autonomy, business model, and alternatives in the network of provision, affects what responses we use
at a provider level: specific concerns (eg, low educational outcomes for specific learner groups) can have specific associated responses, or responses might only be applied to pockets of provision or to provision with outcomes that are not improving. We also consider a provider’s existing compliance requirements.
Indicators
Indicators are signs that performance may need to improve, to minimise potential risk to learner outcomes and/or to government investment. They increase the likelihood that we will use more or stronger responses. Indicators include:
low or declining educational performance
low educational outcomes for specific learner groups
unfavourable quality assurance reports
unsatisfactory Plan quality (or components of a Plan), including learner success milestones
under- or over-delivery
unsatisfactory progress following previous responses
breach of funding conditions
non-compliance with criteria for significant Plan amendments or replacement Plans
adverse audit and investigation findings.
Mitigations
Mitigations are factors or actions that (where satisfactory) can lower risk and increase our confidence that expectations will be met. Satisfactory mitigations decrease the likelihood of further responses and/or the severity of those applied. Mitigations can include:
proactive communication about indicators
improved educational performance
improving educational outcomes for specific learner groups
proactive actions taken (eg, collaboration with other providers)
demonstrable outcomes other than educational (eg, community impact)
improved quality assurance reports.
Key principles underpin every response decision
Evidence-based
We make informed decisions based on best available data, information and intelligence. We understand and apply knowledge of the sector, learner demand, stakeholder needs and best practice.
Fair, transparent and consistent
We use engagement to maintain transparency with providers and understand the context that makes our decisions fair. Our methods and processes build trust and confidence in the system for learners, industry, communities and government. We balance costs and risks in proportion to outcomes.
Learners at the centre
We incentivise, promote and enable improved educational outcomes for everyone by making providers accountable for how they deliver education and the outcomes they achieve. We expect providers to recognise learner diversity and meet learners’ needs and aspirations.
Continuously improving the system
We improve the system’s effectiveness through reviewing and updating internal processes for deciding and applying responses, as necessary. We improve the system through the tools and guidance we provide to the sector and the network of provision we invest in.
Source: New Zealand Police
Motorists are advised of delays on State Highway 2, Aongatete after a truck broke down.
Reports came in to Police around 8:15am, of the incident in the northbound lane about 500m north of Wright Road.
There are no injuries but motorists are advised there is significant traffic build-up as a result, and are urged to delay travel if possible.
ENDS
Source: NZ Music Month takes to the streets
The Minister for Infrastructure has referred the first two non-listed projects into the Fast-track approval process under the Fast-track Approvals Act 2024.
“The Fast-track Approvals Act contains two pathways for projects to enter the Government’s new one-stop shop approvals process.
“The first pathway, Schedule 2 of the Act – commonly referred to as the Fast-track list – contains 149 projects which can apply directly to the Environmental Protection Authority to have an expert panel assess the project, decide whether to consent it, and apply any relevant conditions. The first three expert panels are already underway and more are expected soon.
“The second pathway is for project owners to apply to the Minister for Infrastructure for referral into the Fast-track process. For this pathway, the Minister for Infrastructure must consult the Minister for the Environment and any other Ministers with relevant portfolios, along with iwi and the relevant local authority, before deciding whether to refer the project.
“I have today referred the first two projects into the Fast-track process.
“One of these projects is the Ayrburn Screen Hub. This application is for the construction and operation of a film and television production facility on about 26 hectares of land between Arrowtown and Lake Hayes, Otago.
“The other project is Ashbourne in Matamata, Waikato. This application is for a residential and retirement development project of 530 new homes and 250 retirement units, along with associated commercial development and infrastructure and two solar farms with the capacity to power 8000 homes.
“These two projects may now move to the next stage in the Fast-track process by lodging substantive applications with the EPA to be considered by expert panels.”
Note to editor:
Project details will be published on the Fast-track website: www.fasttrack.govt.nz.
The three projects currently being considered by expert panels are:
Bledisloe North Wharf and Fergusson North Berth Extension (Auckland)
Source: Consumer NZ
The Co-operative Bank has topped the rankings for customer satisfaction, while ANZ finished at the bottom, according to Consumer NZ’s latest independent survey of New Zealand banking customers.
The Co-operative Bank has taken out the top spot in Consumer’s latest banking satisfaction survey, earning a customer satisfaction score of 77%.
At the other end of the scale, ANZ – the country’s largest bank – scored just 57%. The average satisfaction score across all banks was 64%.
“This is the fourth year in a row that The Co-operative Bank has won our People’s Choice award,” says Jon Duffy, CEO of Consumer NZ.
“It’s an impressive result, especially considering its market share – less than 1%.
“Bigger is not necessarily better. ANZ is New Zealand’s most profitable bank, with the biggest market share, but when it comes to customer satisfaction, it finished bottom of our survey.
Consumer’s annual independent survey measures customer satisfaction across 17 areas, including trust, value for money, digital banking, and customer service.
Don’t bank on the big banks
Duffy notes this year’s survey results come amid persistent concerns about the state of competition in New Zealand’s banking sector and the ever-present threat of scams.
Our survey also found that more than 1 in 5 New Zealanders have fallen victim to a scam that has involved their bank account or a financial service.
While some progress has been made by banks to address scams – following pressure from central government and advocates for banks to increase efforts to protect customers – New Zealand still lags behind other countries when it comes to banking technology.
“The pace of innovation in the sector has been glacial. Technologies like comprehensive open banking and real-time payments that could save consumers money and keep us safe are still on the ‘to do’ list for banks,” says Duffy.
”Our research also shows fewer than 3% of New Zealanders switch banks each year – one of the lowest switching rates of any service sector we monitor.
“Low switching rates and low satisfaction scores – particularly among banks with the biggest customer bases – is never a good sign for consumers. Banks are yet to deliver improvements to their switching services, as recommended by the Commerce Commission’s market study to improve competition in the sector.
“This is why we publish our annual satisfaction surveys. We strongly encourage people to do their homework and switch to a bank with higher customer satisfaction. It’s easier than you might think and a powerful way to foster competition so that we can collectively raise the bar,” says Duffy.
Key findings from Consumer’s 2025 banking satisfaction survey
The Co-operative Bank achieved the highest overall satisfaction score (77%) delivering consistent, above-average experiences across the board, particularly around digital banking, savings interest rates, and advice
ANZ scored the lowest customer satisfaction rating (57%), with particularly low scores for interest on savings, fees, responsible lending, advice and overall value for money
Consumer says the 20-point gap between the survey’s top and bottom performers highlights just how much customer experience can differ between banks. The full survey results (paywalled) and methodology are available on Consumer’s website: Best and worst banks in 2025. https://consumernz.cmail20.com/t/i-l-fhdtre-ijjdkdttjk-j/
Notes
Our data is from a nationally representative survey of 1,920 New Zealanders, aged 18 years and older, conducted online in February 2025
Ratings cover satisfaction across 17 key service areas. Satisfaction ratings show the proportion of respondents who scored their provider 8, 9 or 10 on a scale from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied).
Market share is based on the latest figures from the Banking Ombudsman Scheme Dashboard.
Annual profit before tax figures are from each bank’s latest financial disclosures.
