Category: Politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

Winston Peters has taken a fresh crack at Christopher Luxon over immigration, asking how the prime minister can talk about the need for a “careful” approach while also signing up to the India free trade agreement (FTA).

It’s the latest example of internal coalition friction as New Zealand First continues to rail against the FTA’s “ludicrous immigration implications”.

In a speech to Auckland business leaders on Wednesday afternoon, Luxon signalled a tightening of immigration policy, warning that the wrong settings would only stoke the “politics of division” seen abroad.

“You should expect to see careful policy on immigration from National as we get closer to the election,” Luxon said. “When faced with a choice between social stability and your bottom line, I will choose the former every single time.”

Asked about Luxon’s remarks on his way into Parliament, Peters responded with disbelief.

“How do you reconcile that with the Indian free trade agreement? Go and reconcile that quote with the Indian free trade agreement,” Peters said.

“The prime minister needs to reconcile that to you now … I’m asking you to go and ask him, ‘How can you say that … and yet write the free trade agreement in the way they have?'”

Luxon directly referenced the India FTA in his speech, arguing the temporary work visas it granted were evidence of a robust approach targeted at workforce shortages.

Speaking to reporters after his speech, Luxon said the debate over the trade deal had become “perverted” into a “fear of mass migration”.

“That is just factually incorrect,” he said.

“These are Kiwis who have left everything they know, chosen to come to this country, they work incredibly hard, they send their kids to school, they don’t go on welfare. And they are fantastic Kiwis.”

Luxon said New Zealand did not have the same problems as other countries because of its “very smart, targeted, fair immigration system”.

“It’s not like [Nigel] Farage and railing against it in the UK, or Pauline Hanson in Australia, or other countries that we’re dealing with. We have legal migration, but … it requires a dynamic approach where you are constantly making sure those settings are optimised and are linked to our economic strategy and our infrastructure.”

Back at Parliament, Immigration Minister Erica Stanford told media immigration should not be a major election issue because the government had done “such a good job” getting the settings right.

“In an election year, there’ll be people who say things that might whip up some sentiment, that’s unfortunate,” she said.

“But in my world … I’ve made sure that our immigration system is fit for purpose and working for New Zealanders.”

Labour leader Chris Hipkins said all three coalition parties were lining up some “very ugly anti-migrant rhetoric” for the election campaign.

“From Shane Jones talking about a butter chicken tsunami, to David Seymour talking about the character of New Zealand being changed forever, it’s clear this government want to blame migrants for the economic position the country is in.”

Responding, ACT leader David Seymour said Labour was partially to blame for the wider frustration growing in the wider community.

“They had hundreds of thousands of people through the border before Covid. They shut the border, and then they gave nearly a quarter of a million people residence with no questions asked,” he said.

“It’s creating a lot of problems, and the Labour Party have that firmly at their door.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has promised “careful” immigration policy and signalled more capital spending than expected in an annual pre-Budget speech,

Speaking about the need for social cohesion, Luxon highlighted his own electorate of Botany as “more diverse than most”, saying many of Chinese, Korean, Malaysian and Indian New Zealanders were being “unfairly and unreasonably vilified”.

He said during the Covid-19 pandemic, ministers had “too often prioritised their own political interests over the interest of the public”, and the media “determined to flatter New Zealand’s relative performance, also failed”.

“Since then, failed immigration policies in Europe and North America have also stoked a politics of division online. Despite prudent policies and the natural advantages of geography, immigration now seems to be an emerging political issue in New Zealand, too,” he said, in what could be seen as a swipe at New Zealand First’s criticisms of the India free trade deal.

He pointed to the government’s moves to tighten immigration law and said National would be watching closely.

“And you should expect to see careful policy on immigration from National as we get closer to the election … when it comes to immigration, when faced with a choice between social stability and your bottom line, I will choose the former every single time.”

Pointing to the United States “now focusing more exclusively on its own view of its own interests – America first”, and Russia having made “its brutal intentions clear in Europe” and China “expanding its influence”, Luxon painted a now-familiar picture of an erosion of the international rule of law.

“When you turn on the news at night and see alliances straining, trade wars flaring and the rules being rewritten by the powerful, it is only natural to feel as though the ground is shifting beneath you,” he said, before offering an optimistic observation.

“We have faced similar challenges before, and we have overcome them.”

He hearkened back to world wars, giving a message of hope in an increasingly volatile world.

“The outcome was not inevitable. It was not guaranteed. People were frightened, and they were right to be frightened,” he said. “They didn’t just win a war. They built the peace that followed.”

Also addressing a need for cooperation with like-minded partners on defence and trade, he also drew attention to the need for energy independence.

“On too many occasions, private capital, eager to bolster domestic energy production, has been pushed to the sidelines by overzealous planners and politicians in recent years,” he said.

“The reality is that when faced with energy shock after energy shock, it’s very hard to justify backing the skink over the solar farm.”

He pointed to the government’s responses to the fuel crisis, while noting “more action is required”.

That could be delivered through changes to Budget allowances – with less operational spending at $2.1b, down from $2.4b; but more capital spending at $5.7b.

“The recent crisis has acted as a timely reminder that significant levels of capital investment will be required in the coming years,” Luxon said.

“That doesn’t reflect a permanently higher rate of borrowing – we’ll need to get the balance right in the years ahead, as we rebuild our fiscal buffers … The truth is that as a country we don’t save nearly enough, and rely too much on money borrowed from overseas to support our lifestyles. That must change.”

Finance Minister Nicola Willis will deliver her third Budget on 28 May in what are constrained fiscal times.

The conflict in Iran and the global fuel crisis it has triggered required a certain level of re-forecasting and reprioritising of the Budget in recent months.

There were no pre-Budget announcements expected in Christopher Luxon’s speech to a Business NZ audience on Wednesday, though some are due to trickle out from other ministers in the coming days.

The only policy announced to date is the scrapping of the third year of fees-free tertiary study.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

RNZ will livestream the Prime Minister’s pre-Budget speech in Auckland that is due to start at 1pm at the top of this page.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is set to give a speech focussing on geopolitics, New Zealand’s role in the world, and the impact it will have on this year’s government Budget.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis will deliver her third Budget on 28 May in what are constrained fiscal times.

The conflict in Iran and the global fuel crisis it has triggered required a certain level of re-forecasting and reprioritising of the Budget in recent months.

There are no pre-Budget announcements expected in Christopher Luxon’s speech to a Business NZ audience on Wednesday, though some are due to trickle out from other ministers in the coming days.

The only policy announced to date is the scrapping of the third year of fees-free tertiary study.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Proposed changes to climate legislation are an attack on the rule of law, the Environmental Defence Society says.

The government announced on Tuesday it would amend climate law to prevent companies from being sued over damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

But Environmental Defence Society chief executive Gary Taylor told RNZ that the fact it was about climate law was incidental.

“It’s actually an attack on the rule of law,” he said.

In 2024, iwi leader and activist Mike Smith was granted permission by the Supreme Court to sue Fonterra and other major dairy and fossil fuel companies.

He argued the companies, which collectively contributed about a third of New Zealand’s emissions, had a legal duty to him and others in communities that are being damaged by the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.

The hearing, which was sent back to the High Court, was due to start in April next year.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the change would apply to current and future cases.

Taylor said there were two things wrong with the proposal.

“The first is that the government is proposing to limit New Zealanders’ rights to sue in civil proceedings, and the second is that it’s doing it when there’s an active case, Mr Smith’s case, before the courts that the Supreme Court has ruled should be heard.”

Taylor said Goldsmith should be ashamed of himself “for bringing a bill of this kind to Parliament”.

“I think his colleague, the Attorney General, should be investigating it for lack of consistency with the Bill of Rights Act.

“It’s pretty outrageous, and it raises issues that go far beyond climate change into the so-called comity between the different arms of government – the executive, the Parliament, and the courts – and here we’ve got a prime example of executive overreach, where they’re wanting to intervene in a judicial process and take someone’s legitimate rights away from them.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The lawyer of a New Zealander held by the United States’ Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) believes she was transferred from the state of California to Arizona because the state takes a harsher view of federal immigration law.

Everlee Wihongi was detained by ICE when re-entering the US on a Green Card a month ago, following a family holiday in New Zealand.

Wihongi was originally detained and held in Los Angeles, but was transferred to a different facility in the Republican-voting state Arizona.

Lawyer Marc Christopher told RNZ he had been scheduled to talk to her on Saturday afternoon (local time), but had not been notified that she was transferred the night before.

“When I logged in to speak with her, I had nothing but an empty chair there in front of me.”

Christopher said he never used to see transfers like this, but under the Trump administration, it was happening frequently.

He said it seemed the government was intentionally transferring detained immigrants to states with courts that would interpret federal law in a way that was less favourable to immigrants.

He pointed out the government was heavily investing in detention facilities in southern Rebublican-voting states, such as “Alligator Alcatraz“.

Transferring clients also made it incredibly challenging for him to communicate with them, including Wihongi, he said.

“I can’t meet with them hardly in person, and the ability to have a Zoom call with them is very limited. I’m normally limited to 20 minutes at a time, and it takes a couple of days to set up an appointment.”

Christopher said he was confident Wihongi had been charged at her first appearance before a judge on 28 April, but those charges had not been communicated to her.

“They have made allegations against her as far as conduct … but they have not pointed to the law, the United States law, that makes her removable.”

The conduct allegation that has led to Wihongi’s detention relates to a decade-old conviction for a felony offence of marijuana possession.

Foreign Minister Winston Peters previously claimed she was detained because she had lied about that offence.

But Christopher said she had been detained simply because she had been convicted of that offence – not because she had lied about anything.

That was because of a nuance in US law that meant the previous conviction did not require her deportation, but it would prevent her from re-entering the country, should she leave, he said.

“Let’s say Everlee had remained in the United States and had applied for her citizenship, she would have been able to get her citizenship and then travel in and out of the country, but because she travelled out with a controlled substance violation before she got her citizenship, she’s prohibited from coming back in.”

Grounds for relief

Wihongi has a court date to have the earlier underlying felony conviction vacated, which could secure her release, Christopher said.

That was set to take place in the state of Wisconsin on 21 May.

The basis of that appeal was that Wihongi’s attorney when she was faced the marijuana possession charges, told her that a conviction would not affect her immigration status.

She pleaded guilty to the charge based off incorrect advice, Christopher said.

“Under our constitution, if that happens, a person is able to then vacate their conviction.

“In addition to this, shortly after Everlee’s conviction, the attorney was disbarred for a number of reasons, foremost for lying to his clients for forging documents and forging court orders.”

If that conviction was vacated, the US would no longer have any legal basis to detain her, and she would be released “relatively soon after”.

If they were unable to vacate that underlying conviction, the next step in the immigration case would be to apply for something called a “cancellation of removal”, Christopher said.

“It’s a provision under our statute, which allows permanent residents who have committed deportable offences to remain in the United States.”

But they would need to prove that Wihongi was eligible for that relief, and that was challenging to do currently, as the courts had not stipulated the exact charges she was facing, he said.

It was not yet clear whether she would be charged for a controlled substance violation, or as an aggravated felon.

He explained that under Wisconsin law, possession of marijuana counted as a felony if it was a second offence.

Wihongi had previously been convicted of possession of drug paraphernalia, so when she faced the marijuana possession charges, she was convicted of a felony in Wisconsin.

But federal law applied differently.

Under federal law, a controlled substance possession charge would only be a felony if it was the second drug possession charge, and the paraphernalia charge would not be considered.

If Wihongi was to be charged as as an aggravated felon, he would argue that the federal law should be applied, not the Wisconsin law, Christopher said.

“That’s the nuanced argument that we’re going to make. I don’t even know if I need to make the argument because they haven’t even set forth that that’s what they’re charging [her with].”

ICE ‘reluctant to cooperate’

Another challenge Wihongi was facing was whether ICE would allow her to attend the Wisconsin hearing.

“The court is trying to work with the ICE facility to allow Everlee to appear and testify by video,” Christopher said.

“The court will allow it, but oftentimes the ICE facilities are reluctant to cooperate with state courts.”

It was very common for people detained by ICE to not be allowed to attend their hearings in any fashion, Christopher said.

He was worried this would impact her chances of having the underlying possession conviction quashed.

“Normally the judge and the district attorney will want to hear testimony directly from the defendant.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Judith Collins has made her final speech to Parliament as an MP this afternoon, ahead of her exit from politics.

Her departure brings to an end a 24-year career as an MP, which has seen her hold 18 Ministerial portfolios – some of them twice – as well as leading National in opposition for the 2020 election.

She subsequently remained an MP for National under Christopher Luxon, and became a key minister in the current government.

Collins is set to take up a role as president of the Law Commission.

Her resignation will not trigger a by-election in her electorate of Papakura because of its proximity to the election.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Judith Collins is making her final speech to Parliament as an MP this afternoon, ahead of her exit from politics.

Her departure brings to an end a 24-year career as an MP, which has seen her hold 18 Ministerial portfolios – some of them twice – as well as leading National in opposition for the 2020 election.

She subsequently remained an MP for National under Christopher Luxon, and became a key minister in the current government.

Collins is set to take up a role as president of the Law Commission.

Her resignation will not trigger a by-election in her electorate of Papakura because of its proximity to the election.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The government considered phasing out the fees-free tertiary education scheme but decided it was too complicated, opting instead to axe it in one go.

The policy which covers the cost of students’ third year of tertiary study will be gone in the upcoming Budget.

Tertiary Education Minister Penny Simmonds on Tuesday said the government did consider staggering the change so students who began studying under the impression their third year would be free, would still still eligible.

“It made it more complicated because obviously people start at different times through the year, so it was easier to have a hard end to it, and then it’s really clear for everyone,” she said.

The funding was never a promise, Simmonds said.

“Things change from year to year, from budget to budget, and it hasn’t been something that has necessarily incentivised people to study.”

The scheme was first introduced by the former Labour government in 2017 as a first-year fees-free scheme, beginning from 2018, before the current coalition shifted it to the final year from 2025.

That meant current second-year students missed out on getting their first year free, and would now also miss out on the final year.

The Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the scheme was “quite a failure” and did not achieve any of its goals.

Some students have told RNZ they relied on it, and they’re questioning whether they can still afford their study.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

National’s partners ACT and New Zealand First have taken a tumble in support in the latest Taxpayers’ Union-Curia poll, but the coalition bloc is still holding its lead.

Under the results, released on Tuesday, the government bloc would receive 62 seats, down three since April, compared to the opposition bloc on 58, up three.

Labour remained the most popular party on 31.9 percent, but took a sizeable knock since the last survey, dropping 1.5 points.

National edged up 0.2 points to hit 30 percent. New Zealand First was down 1.9 points to 11.7 percent.

The Green Party was in fourth spot on 9.7 percent, also down 1.9 points, while ACT took the biggest hit, down 2.5 points to 6.5 percent.

Te Pāti Māori came in at 4.1 percent, up 1.5 points.

On those numbers, National would bring 39 MPs into Parliament. They would be joined by 15 MPs from New Zealand First and eight from ACT, to make a 62-strong coalition.

Labour would pick up 41 MPs but would not have a pathway to power, even with the 12 Green MPs and five from Te Pāti Māori.

On the preferred prime minister measure, National’s Christopher Luxon retook the lead, climbing 1 point to 21.5 percent. Labour’s Chris Hipkins dropped 2.7 points to 19 percent.

New Zealand First’s Winston Peters is in third spot, on 11.6 percent, down 0.5 points.

The poll was conducted by Curia Market Research Ltd for the NZ Taxpayers’ Union. It is a random poll of 1,000 adult New Zealanders and is weighted to the overall adult population. It was conducted by phone (landlines and mobile) and online between Sunday 03 May and Thursday 07 May 2026. It has a maximum margin of error of +/- 3.1%. The number of decided voters on the vote questions was 914. There were 49 (4.9 percent) undecided voters and 37 (3.7 percent) who refused the vote question.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has dismissed the OECD’s warnings about the government’s LNG plans as “a load of rubbish” and says he remains “very interested” in setting up an import facility.

In its annual economic survey of New Zealand published last week, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) said the LNG proposal locking in fossil dependence and instead recommended investment in non-gas generation like biomass or pumped hydro.

Speaking to reporters at Parliament on Tuesday, Luxon said he was “not interested” in the OECD’s findings or recommendations.

“The report’s a load of rubbish,” he said.

Luxon said the coalition government was not going to tolerate “bumper sticker” policies or the sort of “kumbaya and mush” that Labour pursued while it was in power.

“We’re the ones that are dealing with a failed energy policy from the last administration.”

In February, the government announced a “definitive decision” to build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility in Taranaki, designed to reduce price spikes in dry years and the associated risk premium built into power bills. The whole-of-life cost was to be spread across all electricity users through a new levy.

Luxon later softened his rhetoric, after conflict flared up in the Middle East, and said no final decisions had been made on the proposal: “If it doesn’t stack up, we won’t be doing it.”

On Tuesday, however, Luxon said the government remained “very interested” in the plan.

“We’re continuing our procurement process. We said that we’d come back in the middle of the year having looked at the business case for it. We are very interested in it,” he said. “It’s just making sure the commercials stack up.”

Luxon said the government was pursuing an “and-and-and” strategy by also encouraging a “renewables boom” and strategic reserves in Huntly and Marsden Point.

Speaking separately, Energy Minister Simeon Brown said the government would take into account the situation in the Middle East when making final decisions on its plan of action.

But, asked about the OECD’s findings, Brown said the government had considered all the alternatives and had identified the LNG facility as its “preferred option”.

He then turned his sights on the Labour Party, accusing its leader Chris Hipkins of being “the man without a plan”. He said Labour’s Lake Onslow hydro proposal was a “boondoggle” which would not have delivered any energy till 2037.

“We cannot stand by and wait till 2037 to resolve this issue. It needs to be resolved much faster than that,” Brown said.

“Look, there will be alternatives that companies continue to invest in – more renewable energy generation, geothermal and others. But we need to solve the dry year risk.”

Hipkins told reporters the LNG import facility was a “gold-plated bad idea” which would cost New Zealanders more through a new gas tax.

“It’s going to cost every New Zealand household more money in their power bills. It’s going to raise the price of power in New Zealand, and it’s going to make us more dependent on highly volatile fossil fuels.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand