Category: Politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

Unions want the Prime Minister to step in and resolve their collective bargaining impasses, frustrated that progress is not being made.

The joint letter to Christopher Luxon was signed by the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, New Zealand Nurses Organisation, New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union, Post Primary Teachers’ Association, NZEI Te Riu Roa, and the Public Service Association.

“The recent strike action, rallies and marches is evidence of that frustration on the part of union members. At those rallies and marches there was a clear call for the government to listen to those workforces and to urgently make progress on the matters relating to those workforces and the bargaining,” the letter said.

“We believe that it is appropriate in these circumstances for the Prime Minister to step in and meet with the unions’ leaders to explore possible ways forward and settlement options. While there are different issues in each sector we see there is sufficient commonality across the bargaining to make that an appropriate step.”

The unions believed the prime minister’s intervention would mean the impasses could be moved on, and bargaining could be concluded satisfactorily for all parties.

The prime minister’s office confirmed to RNZ the letter had been received, and said the sender would be responded to directly.

More than 100,000 people walked off the job last month, despite rallies in some parts of the country not going ahead due to weather.

Last month, Luxon heavily criticised the organisers of the strike, saying it was “politically motivated” and he felt no need to meet with them.

“The negotiations, the terms and conditions, are done between the Public Service Commissioner doing the centralised bargaining and also the CEO of Health New Zealand, who are the employers, with the respective unions,” he said at the time.

The strike was held on the same day as former Prime Minister Jim Bolger’s funeral, which Luxon attended instead.

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 coalition has officially missed its commitment to deliver 500 new police officers in the first two years in government.

But the minister responsible is defending the target, saying it had led to improvements across the recruitment process.

Thursday marks two years since the government was sworn in, three days after the signings of the coalition agreements.

New Zealand First and National’s coalition agreement contained a commitment to “training no fewer than 500 new frontline police within the first two years”.

A report from the Treasury in September to the finance minister showed September 2026 as the likely target for 500 additional officers, and that would still require significant catch-up.

Nicola Willis had requested a progress update “in light of public reporting on slow progress in meeting this target”, as well as information on how Police had used any underspends, and options for returning the funding if the target was not met.

The report said that given the measures Police had taken regarding attrition and recruitment, Police considered it remained “well-positioned” to achieve the target by mid-2026.

“Police has been reluctant to specify a specific month when it expects the target to be achieved but our analysis of the information provided by them suggests the target is likely to be reached in September 2026.”

The associate police minister and New Zealand First MP Casey Costello, who was delegated responsibility for the target, said ministers had always said recruitment was an operational responsibility for Police, and did not want to see any drop in standards in pursuit of the target.

Costello said the country had an “incredibly well-trained and quality” constabulary, with the highest number of frontline police in New Zealand’s history, and that since the government created the target there had been record numbers of applicants and recruits.

“The timing for 500 new frontline Police was ambitious, but the extra constables will be delivered and the target has driven improvements across the recruitment process, from marketing through to the creation of a new training facility in Auckland,” she said.

“Two years ago, there wasn’t a proper pipeline of applicants, with recruitment barely covering attrition rates. On top of that, to improve training standards, Police increased the length of training courses from 16 to 20 weeks soon after we became government so no wings graduated from February to May 2024. This meant that the number of Police actually declined until then.”

The Treasury document showed Police also had a $7.915 million underspend in 2024-25, the majority of which came from the delays in meeting the target.

Of that, $5.537m was moved to the 2025-26 budget to keep meeting the costs of the target, with the remaining $2.378m moved to the overall Police pot.

Police had sought to address recruitment and attrition issues by reducing the time spent in the recruitment pipeline before training, with the overall timeline reducing from 20 months to 12.

Police had also increased training wing capacity from 80 to 100, including a new facility in Auckland.

“Police is unlikely to be able to speed up delivery of the target given it already appears to have taken measures to speed up recruitment,” the document said.

Police had allowed for attrition at around 5.8 percent in its planning to meet the target – higher than the decade long average of 4.5 percent per year.

Attrition had peaked at around 5.9 percent in the 12 months to December 2024, and dipped to 5.4 percent in the 12 months to August 2025.

Police attributed that higher than usual attrition to an ageing workforce, and campaigns from Australia targeting New Zealand staff.

Costello said attrition rates had reduced below 5 percent, and there was a strong recruitment pipeline in place, with 80 recruits set to graduate in December.

Total graduate numbers in 2025 are expected to be between 750 and 770, compared to 617 in 2023 and 562 in 2024.

“Overall, Police will have brought in approximately 900 new constables – graduates through the Police College and re-joins – during 2025. This will be the most ever achieved in a year,” Costello said.

Labour’s police spokesperson Ginny Andersen said the government had “clearly failed” its promise, saying it had been pushed from November 2025 to June 2026, then August, and now September.

“It’s always good to have as many recruits as possible, and it’s great to have recruitment campaigns in place. But I think the problem is, if New Zealanders have been told that they’re going to have 500 more police in place by the 27th of November, then there is a clear expectation that the government should deliver on that promise, and they’ve failed to do that.”

Andersen said the Police Minister Mark Mitchell had known “from the get-go” that two years was going to be difficult.

“This has caused clear tensions in the coalition agreement, but the failure to deliver those extra police officers just puts more pressure on an already stretched front line.”

Acting Deputy Commissioner Tusha Penny said as at 17 November, there were 313 recruits currently under training, and Police had 10,449 constable full-time equivalents.

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

It’s billed as the biggest shake-up to councils in 30 years, but a lot of questions about how the government’s regional council “reset” will work and what will happen remain unanswered.

The government on Tuesday announced plans to replace regional councillors with boards made up of mayors and maybe some minister-appointed representatives.

The ministers argue local government has lost its social licence and change is needed – but current councillors and opposition parties are questioning whether the solution on offer is the right one.

Part of the problem, according to the government, is many people don’t even know what a regional council does.

So here’s what we know, and the thorny issues yet to be teased out.

What are regional councils anyway?

New Zealand has various kinds of councils, but the main three types are:

• Regional councils (11 of these in NZ)
• Territorial authorities (67)
• Unitary authorities (6, including Auckland)

They have different roles and responsibilities.

Regional councils look after the environmental aspects of resource management including things like: flood protection, air quality, and pest control, as well as public transport planning and funding, civil defence, and bulk water supply and treatment.

Set up under the 1989 local government reforms, they cover large regions based primarily on water catchments or drainage basins.

These regions usually include cities, towns and rural areas which are in turn managed by local councils – the “territorial authorities” which include city councils and district councils.

As an example, the Greater Wellington Regional Council handles the regional council responsibilities for the Kāpiti Coast, Porirua, Wellington City, Lower and Upper Hutt, South Wairarapa, Carterton, Masterton and part of the Tararua district – each of which have their own city or district council.

The territorial authorities are responsible for meeting residents’ needs by providing services, including roads, water services, waste and recycling collection, parks and libraries, and administering public safety bylaws.

The third category – unitary authorities – basically combine the responsibilities for territorial and regional councils so the area just has one council.

So what’s the government doing?

The proposal revealed on Tuesday by RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Local Government Minister Simon Watts is a two-step process.

The first step is abolishing the elected regional councillors and having the mayors of the territorial authorities in each region taking over their responsibilities as a new group, given the memorable name “Combined Territories Boards”.

There would be 11 of these boards, to match the current regional boundaries, and the government has also suggested its own representatives could be installed on the boards to provide greater oversight from the Crown.

It should be noted that at this stage the broader regional council infrastructure including staff, contracts, and asset ownership would remain unchanged, it’s just the elected councillors who would be replaced by the CTBs.

The second step is to task these boards with developing a strategy (Regional Reorganisation Plan) for how to reorganise council responsibilities in the long term.

The plans could conceivably decide to continue on with the CTBs, or they could come up with something new including amalgamating some territorial authorities, or they could set up regional agencies to take over planning for things like public transport – which often makes sense to plan at a wider regional level.

The plans would need to meet certain criteria set by the government including:

• Big picture fit: the plan supports national priorities like housing, infrastructure and business competition
• Short and long term affordability: a financially responsible arrangement to manage rates increases and support them to manage assets well
• Better services: reorganising local services so they work better and cost less
• Clear leadership: the plan sets out who does what and who is responsible across councils
• Local voice: decisions happen at the right local level, and the plan provides fair and effective representation of communities
• Treaty arrangements: all Treaty of Waitangi settlement commitments including for rivers are managed in accordance with the settlements
• Realistic: includes details for how to put the plan into action, for example with a step-by-step timeline for establishing a new regional roading agency or setting out how council staff might be restructured

Consultation on the plans will be mandatory, including with local communities, iwi and hapū, and other stakeholders.

Once developed, the plans would go to the Local Government Minister for signoff and the restructuring would take effect.

At that point, the wider regional council infrastructure could be broken up into different unitary authorities, or the territorial authorities may find it simpler to combine into one region-wide unitary authority.

Bishop said the government had an “open mind” about how the councils would be reorganised, but with the changes brought through the RMA reforms “people will see the attraction of unitary authorities”. He said it would be fair to say the reforms would work best, democratically, if it ended up with more unitary authorities.

“With my Wellington MP hat on … the feedback I get from Wellington councils and mayors and actually frankly Wellington regional ratepayers that having Lower Hutt and Upper Hutt and Porirua and Wellington City is pretty nuts – so if this proposal goes ahead Wellington will get the chance to do what they have not done for quite a long time and seize the opportunity for growth.”

More information about how it could work is available from the Department of Internal Affairs and in the discussion document.

Timeframes

The ministers’ announcement at 5pm was also pitched as the launch of public consultation on their proposal, although for now DIA’s consultation page only said a survey would be published soon and to check back later for further updates.

Consultation closes on Friday, 20 February 2026.

The ministers said they aimed to have legislation drafted based on that consultation in mid-2026, and passed by mid-2027 – which would be after next year’s election.

Bishop would not guarantee the current councillors – elected just last month – would necessarily see out their full term.

Presuming the new government continues on with the proposed changes, the legislation would set up the CTBs, which would have two years from when they were established to produce the Regional Reorganisation Plan.

Complications: Votes and boundaries …

The proposal sounds simple on the surface, but there’s some things which make it all a bit more complicated.

One thing the discussion document seeks further feedback on is how much power each mayor would have on the board, the problem being that it’s difficult to find a solution that’s fair for everyone.

A simple model of giving each mayor one vote means smaller rural populations would have a lot more power, proportionally, through their mayor than those representing big cities. Then again, giving each mayor a number of votes based purely on population would tilt things in the other direction – basically giving the city mayors all the power.

The government’s solution is to primarily use a population-based vote approach, but have the Local Government Commission apportion more votes to smaller districts to balance it out a bit. This would either be left entirely up to the commission or the government would provide it with a set of criteria based on the feedback from the public consultation.

For resource management decisions, a majority of both the population-weighted votes and a majority of board members would be needed, as a way of providing an extra backstop.

The discussion document sets out that Crown Commissioners could also be brought in to “ensure that the national interest is considered in regional decision-making”.

They could either replace regional councillors (instead of having the CTBs), or could be brought in as additional members of the CTBs – with a range of options for how much power they could wield:

• Observer only: non-voting
• Veto power: able to stop decisions where they think it’s necessary in the interests of New Zealand as a whole
• Majority vote: Crown Commissioners hold more than 50 percent of the weighted votes, with the rest distributed among mayors

The document did not give an option for giving the commissioners a minority vote.

Another difficulty is that some territorial authorities are split across multiple regions, for example Taupō District is mostly covered by Waikato Regional Council, but also has areas in Bay of Plenty, Hawke’s Bay, and an apparently unpopulated sliver of Manawatū-Whanganui.

The government says it doesn’t want to change regional or district boundaries, so the discussion document presents two options:

• Having smaller isolated areas “adopted” into a neighbouring region, with the district mayor given additional voting power in line with the additional population. For example, the roughly 150 people of Taupō district who are in the Bay of Plenty region would be ‘adopted’ by a nearby mayor who gets extra votes on their behalf. The community is not currently expected to be able to vote on which mayor would represent them, but the government is considering that as an option.
• Having districts with isolated populations represented on all CTBs. For example, the Taupō communities would have a share of the votes on three different regional CTBs based on the population within each region. It’s possible a local ward councillor might represent Taupō district residents in Bay of Plenty, instead of the mayor.

The government proposes to either decide these on a case-by-case basis by the Local Government Commission, or based on some population threshold set by the government.

Hang on, why is all this happening?

The ministers give two main reasons for making these changes: that the coming RMA reforms will shake up regional responsibilities anyway and it makes sense to change local government at the same time; and that the status quo setup of councils simply isn’t fit for purpose anymore.

They argue the two layers of council (regional vs territorial) means costly duplication of services and that each can disagree over how things should be done, slowing down progress.

Shifting to one layer would be expected, Bishop says, to save ratepayers money by putting “downward pressure” on rates increases – stopping them from rising as quickly – and the discussion document says it will make decisions “much more coordinated”.

Bishop on Tuesday pointed to turnout at the recent local government elections as evidence local government as a whole “has lost the social licence, and that New Zealanders have lost faith in local government”.

But while warnings were sounded about low turnout ahead of the recent elections concluding last month, a bump on the last day meant the final turnout at 39.4 percent ended up close to the previous election in 2022.

Voting rates have been falling over the past three decades, but the rate is close to that of the UK, and higher than in the US.

Another reason for the government to step in is cost: council rates have been rising significantly in recent years and the government wants to be seen to be tackling the cost of living.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon last August led the charge on calling for councils to tighten their belts and stop wasteful spending on “fantasies” – a message that seemed at odds with his previous anti-Three Waters campaign promising localism and devolution.

Some councils pointed out the government had continued to place additional demands on them without providing the funding to do so; that laws prevented councils seeking new funding in ways that did not rely on rates; that the rising cost of water services were forcing councils to prioritise spending on that; and that councils’ share of total taxation through rates was about 10 percent compared to central government’s 90 percent.

Reasons not to do it?

Opposition parties seem to agree something should be done to change the structure of local government in New Zealand – but warn the government’s approach could remove expertise and community voice.

They argue it is undemocratic to remove the elected councillors – particularly if Crown Commissioners reporting to government ministers end up with the power – and that it removes environmental protections the regional councils were set up to oversee.

While Treaty of Waitangi settlements will continue to be honoured, the government is also doing away with Māori constituencies and other regional constituencies – potentially erasing those protected minority voices from the democratic process.

The question of unexpected costs from setting up the boards and restructuring things also remains unanswered, though the ministers are confident it will keep overall costs down in the long run.

Finally, another consideration is that the problem of the structure of local government has been looked at before, several times – most recently and comprehensively with the Future of Local Government review commissioned under the previous Labour government.

Rather than building on that work, the coalition essentially binned that review on coming into office.

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

Newly released advice shows officials urged the government against its welfare crackdown on 18-and-19-year-olds, warning it could actually increase the risk of long-term benefit dependency.

The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) also said the tightened eligibility could incentivise teenage pregnancies and keep abuse victims financially reliant on their abusive parents.

In a statement, Social Development Minister Louise Upston acknowledged the “free and frank” advice but said she did not necessarily agree with all of it.

“Our position is very clear: young people should be in work, in education or in training,” Upston said.

“Young people should first be supported by their parents. We don’t believe a life on welfare is as good as it gets for young people.”

From November 2026, those aged 18 and 19 will only qualify for Jobseeker support if their parents earn less than $65,529 or if they can prove they cannot rely on their parents for financial help.

About 4300 young people are expected to become ineligible.

An MSD regulatory impact statement (RIS), published online, assessed the proposed restrictions as being no better than the status quo overall.

While the new restrictions would save the government money, officials said: “in terms of impact on young people and their families, the costs will likely significantly outweigh the benefits.”

The RIS said teenagers who lost access to benefits would also miss out on MSD support designed to help them into work, such as literacy or numeracy programmes. Without that assistance, those teens could be at greater risk of future benefit dependency.

Officials said there was “no clear evidence” that the changes would incentivise young people to enter employment, education or training, meaning they could well just move on to the benefit at age 20.

“This policy does not address any underlying causes as to why people receive a benefit in the first place.”

The report also said some young people might find themselves cut off altogether as their parents were under “no obligation” to provide support. This was highlighted as a particular risk for members of rainbow communities.

“There is a risk that they may not have access to financial support at all if their parents refuse or are unable to support them financially.”

Alternatively, abuse victims could be forced to turn to their abusers for help.

“This policy may result in young people being expected to be financially dependent on their parents in situations where they have previously been subjected to physical, psychological, emotional, or sexual violence.”

Officials said the policy could also increase demand on food banks and other community services, due to the increased costs for young people and their parents.

The analysis highlighted particular risks for minority groups who were more likely to be represented in the benefit system.

“Disabled people tend to face higher costs of living due to health-related expenses and could be disadvantaged if this is not accounted for in the parental income limit,” the analysis said.

Officials also flagged that some young people might be “incentivised to have children to maintain access to income support”, because the new rules would not apply to young parents.

The RIS shows MSD preferred a very different approach: expanding education, training, and skills programmes to help young people into work.

Officials said this non-regulatory option would better reduce long-term benefit dependency by addressing literacy, numeracy, and employment-readiness barriers.

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 mayor of Wellington says the coalition’s proposed restructure of local government is a “pretty serious attack” on the Crown’s treaty obligations.

The coalition wants mayors of city and district councils to take over the duties of regional councillors, in what would be the biggest local government shakeup in three decades.

The proposed removal of regional seats includes scrapping Māori constituencies.

There are currently two regional councils with specific legislation for Māori represenation: Bay of Plenty Regional Council and Canterbury Regional Council.

The government’s discussion document states the government has “considered the impact of the proposal on Māori rights and interests”.

It also says the proposal “has been designed to not undermine, disrupt or affect Treaty settlements but is seeking a wide range of views to ensure this is the case”.

‘A total backtrack’ – Little

Speaking on Nine to Noon on Wednesday, Wellington mayor Andrew Little said the proposals would impact Māori representation that had been guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi.

“One thing that regional councils do is regulate the environment. The fundamental promise of the Treaty of Waitangi was tino rangatiratanga over whenua, over land, and other valued things.

“So to undermine the representation of Māori over environmental things is a total backtrack on the obligations that [have] been recognised for the last 50 years that the Crown has under the Treaty.

“Regional councils and district councils act effectively with Crown authority when they regulate the environment, so undermining that representation is a pretty serious attack on treaty obligations.”

Little said it would narrow the diversity of representation at council level.

“The proposals that were announced yesterday look like they are diluting, or in fact completely removing that Māori representation on that important function and that cannot be consistent with the Crown’s obligations under the Treaty.”

Speaking more generally on the proposed changes, Little said the direction of travel was amalgamation.

“One obvious conclusion to draw from the proposals, as they’ve been announced, is it is trying to drive towards greater amalgamation.

“It’s not necessarily a bad thing. It’s got to be supported locally and democratically, though.”

Little said the proposals would also “significantly’ add to a mayor’s workload.

“There’s a whole new organisation to get to grips with. There’ll be staff, including a chief executive, that has to have appropriate oversight and support so that adds to what is already a growing workload for mayors.

“I’m not quite sure what the underpinning analysis was that suggested that this was an easy transfer to make.”

RMA needs to be part of discussion – Gisborne mayor

Gisborne mayor Rehette Stoltz said the proposals wouldn’t change the functions of regional councils but they did risk losing technical expertise.

She also said the Resource Management Act had a big part to play in the national conversation about how to best restructure local government.

“Before we criticise regional councils, they’re working under a regime called the Resource Management Act, which we all agree is not fit for purpose.

“So I think we also need to make sure that discussion is had alongside what the functions are that we want to have on a local, regional level or national level.”

Stoltz said Gisborne had operated as a unitary authority since 1989 that did the work of both a city council and regional council.

It had worked well for her region, though that didn’t mean it would be the best approach in other parts of the country, she said.

“It works really well for us because we have a single governance structure making both the local and the regional decisions, which means there is real clear accountability. Your community know exactly who is responsible for that and for what and then we can also have integrated planning across our land, water and infrastructure.

“That works really well for us, because all the major planning and regulatory functions sit under one roof.

“During Cyclone Gabrielle, it was easier to have a coordinated emergency response. When you need rapid decision making, you don’t need to negotiate across multiple councils.

“You have a coordinated response, and your community know exactly who is responsible for what. So there is some reduced duplication but the fact that it works for the Gisborne District Council does not mean it will work for any other region.”

Asked if her community would not support being amalgamated with other regions, she responded: “I think if you asked the people of Gisborne that, that will be a firm no…we have been a unitary authority forever, and it works well for us.

“We never put those discussions aside, though, because we haven’t had a review in 36 years. So this is a once in a lifetime review. The devil will be in the detail.”

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

Regional Development Minister Shane Jones says the current regional council structure stifles economic growth and that regional councils have suffered cost burdens, “green overreach” and too much influence from iwi.

His comments come after the government announced its plan to scrap regional councillors and hand responsibilities over to mayor-led Combined Territories Boards, marking the biggest structural shift in local government in decades.

The boards will take over regional duties and have two years to propose a longer term structure.

The government said the move will cut costs and streamline decision making.

Regional Development Minister and NZ First Deputy Leader Shane Jones has been one of the strongest critics of regional government, previously saying there is “less and less of a justifiable purpose” for keeping regional councils under the new RMA system.

He also described the Otago Regional Council as “the Kremlin of the South Island” after a dispute over mine expansion.

Jones told Morning Report on Wednesday the country can not afford the multiple layers of regional and local government that “stifles growth”.

He believes regional council has been captured, especially in Otago, by “green banshees” who want to block development such as mining.

“I have no doubt in my mind that once the public sinks its teeth into this issue and realise that it’s a burden of cost, we have had green over-reach, we have had hapu over-consumption and we have stifled growth. I believe the vast majority of Kiwis in regional New Zealand agree with me,” Jones said.

He said some regional councillors have been interpreting parliamentary legislation in a “devious” and “negative” way and that is breaking the law.

“If they are not going to continually abide by the law, they are going to disappear.”

Labour’s deputy leader Carmel Sepuloni said there was a case for reorganising regional councils – but the government is forcing change without consultation.

Sepuloni said the government campaigned on handing power back to local communities, but this plan strips it away.

National Minister Nicola Willis said the scrapping of regional councils is about cutting complexity in local government and getting local communities to decide how they want to simplify things.

Willis told Morning Report that it’s also about addressing the cost of living and people’s concerns about rates.

Earlier on Morning Report, Former Local Government NZ regional chair Doug Leeder said the government’s plan has merit.

He said the regional sector of local government have been advocating to have this conversation with ministers for at least the last 12 months.

However, he said it remains to be seen what can incentivise local mayors to act in the best interest of their region.

“What is going to be the incentive for local mayors to remove themselves for their territorial responsibilities, their local communities, and act in the best interest of their region – there lies the challenge.”

Leeder said while the regional sector supports the plan, he believes the level of governance needs to step up for the plan to work.

He said the appointment of external commissioners could help.

The changes are out for consultation, which remains open until 20 February, with the resulting legislation expected to be introduced mid-next year and passed in 2027.

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

Despite dropping in the polls and failing to resonate with voters on a range of issues, Sir Bill English is confident Christopher Luxon is the right person to lead National to victory at next year’s election.

Speaking to 30 with Guyon Espiner, the former Finance Minister said the government has done a “remarkably good job”, adding that Prime Minister Luxon, Winston Peters and David Seymour all deserve credit for what they have achieved.

“They’ve got an equilibrium, and I’m making those comments not just as a former politician, but sitting outside it, involved in running businesses, involved with a wide range of New Zealanders.

“It doesn’t work to change Prime Ministers,” he said. “It’s stable and it’s working.”

While suggesting New Zealand was going through a “rough patch”, Sir Bill said it wasn’t about the government showing “bold leadership”, but rather the government needed to sort out “those barriers that are getting in the way of productive investment and, more importantly, productive employment”.

“This government, it’s a bit less sort of clean cut and well presented, but it is stable. The government’s got a coherence, and it’s getting through a whole lot of serious issues. I think they’ve done a remarkably good job, and probably an unexpectedly good job, of managing themselves.”

On the economy, Sir Bill – who served as Finance Minister under Prime Minister Sir John Key from 2008 to 2016 – said in 12-18 months New Zealand’s will be growing faster than Australia’s.

The current economy feels like it is “struggling to get up out of the mud” because the usual cycle of house prices picking up, which makes people feel good and spend more money, isn’t happening.

“New Zealand’s dealing with some structural shifts in its economy, which means its recovery is slower.

“But in a sense, it will be a higher quality recovery, because it won’t be dependent on some big shift in house prices, and it won’t be as dependent on a surge in immigration.”

Sir Bill said “this amazing, almost bipartisan view that we need to change the rules for housing so that it’s more affordable” is cause for optimism.

When pushed on the increase in inequality, including rising homelessness, Sir Bill pointed to the impacts of previous policy.

“Our poor-quality housing policy in the past has driven a lot of inequality. It’s driven a lot of a burden on low-income people trying to afford housing.

“I don’t think the housing issues were to do with neoliberalism. They were actually to do with over-planning our city’s.

“Poor planning causes poverty, it causes higher costs than would otherwise be the case.”

Sir Bill was also critical of the “state monopoly” which he said has done a “poor job for a long time” when it comes to social housing, and called for more housing to help tackle issues around homelessness.

While economists and politicians have been debating whether a Capital Gains Tax is worthwhile, Sir Bill said “there’s a lot of complexity, not much revenue,” and “the possibility of revenue is significantly less now than it would have been, say, 10 years ago, and certainly 20 years ago.”

On Te Pāti Māori, whom he worked with for three terms, Sir Bill described it as “an often-challenging experience” but “a satisfying one”, before saying the party as it was originally conceived was conservative.

“I don’t mean in the sort of National Party’s right-wing sense, but conservative in that they were trying to rebuild social connection, self-reliance.”

Sir Bill praised the increasing use of te reo Māori in everyday language, and how “in the business world dealing with iwi is now completely normal”, but said “particularly in the public service, performative biculturalism had got completely out of control.”

“I think what you’ve seen recently has been a kind of general political correction.

“What I find interesting is that there’s a debate going on in the political world about whether one party’s anti-Māori or whatever. In the real world the custom and the practice of the people just moves on.”

He added: “there’s nothing wrong with a bit of pushing and shoving when you think the Constitution’s at stake”.

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

While opposition parties agree more needs to be done to make local government work better for everybody, they say the government’s proposals to scrap regional councils could remove a layer of community voice and expertise.

Under the proposals revealed on Tuesday, district and city mayors would take on the regional councils’ roles, forming Combined Territories Boards.

Those boards would then be tasked with coming up with plans to reorganise how their councils are structured long-term.

How those plans look is up to the boards, but they would be assessed against criteria like whether they are realistic, are financially responsible, provide fair and effective representation for communities of interest, and whether they support national priorities, strategies, and goals, are financially responsible.

They would have to be given the final sign-off by the Minister of Local Government.

The government has also stressed it would be “highly unlikely” the status quo is maintained, with Resource Management Act Reform Minister Chris Bishop saying it would be a “fair summation” that they ended up being unitary authorities.

“The status quo can’t remain locked in formaldehyde forever,” Bishop said.

Deon Swiggs is chair of Environment Canterbury, as well as chair of Local Government New Zealand’s regional sector.

He also recognised that the current model was “unsustainable,” but said it was important that accountability, localism, and local voice was transferred to whatever happened in the future.

“We all want to see our economy thrive. We all want to see things get done. And reorganising local government may not achieve those outcomes. It might achieve efficiencies in some areas, but it might not achieve the outcomes that the government wants to see.”

Wiggs was also a Christchurch City Councillor from 2016 to 2019, and said while there were tensions between district and regional councils, it was constructive.

“It’s never been ‘oh, the regional council’s stopping us from doing this’ or ‘the district council’s stopping us from doing that.’ It’s about outcomes,” he said.

“The regional council has a different focus, and the city council has a different focus. They want to drive down costs, and the regional council wants to drive environmental outcomes. Those constructive tensions shouldn’t be looked at as a failure of the system. They should be looked at as actually getting the best outcomes that have longevity in our system.”

Central Otago mayor Tamah Alley said it was a “dramatic shift,” and while mayors put their hands up to represent their communities, “sometimes that asks more of us than we thought at the beginning”.

“It will be a challenge for local government, already under the pump with so much reform on our plates to pick up the additional workload. If that’s the direction that comes from this consultation,” she said.

Alley, who is a Local Government New Zealand national council mayor, said local government had been talking about how to do things in a more efficient and economic way for a while, and the proposals had “pushed the conversation”.

Selwyn mayor Lydia Gliddon said while she could see the intention to streamline decision making, it raised big questions.

She said any new model must not be a restructure for the sake of it.

“These are not small responsibilities. If those functions are reorganised or absorbed, we need absolute clarity that oversight won’t be weakened.”

Nelson is one of the councils that currently operates under a unitary authority model, along with Tasman, Marlborough, Auckland, Chatham Islands, and Gisborne.

Mayor Nick Smith said the proposed changes would make councils “simpler, less costly and will help deliver better services”.

He said the unitary model had meant the Nelson, Tasman, and Marlborough councils had worked “much better,” and it was a “no brainer” to merge Nelson and Tasman.

The Northland Mayoral Forum, which comprises the region’s three district mayors and regional council chair, agreed it was time to review the way local government was structured.

Far North mayor Moko Tepania said all four forum members were unanimous that whatever the outcome of reform, “we want to make sure it’s in the best interests of Northland as a whole. We do not need a ‘one size fits all’ solution imposed by Wellington”.

Whangārei mayor Ken Couper said the priority was “ensuring that any changes deliver real benefits for our communities and our region,” while Kaipara mayor Jonathan Larsen said he looked forward to working with the other Northland councils to get the best possible outcome for ratepayers.

With just under three months of consultation before a final draft, the legislation is not expected to be introduced to Parliament until the middle of next year.

Bishop said what the government had put forward was its preferred model, but it was open to “sensible changes” all the way through the process.

The government would seek to pass it in 2027, lining up with the phasing in of the resource management reforms.

It means, with an election in 2026, a change in government could mean the legislation is dropped.

But Labour’s local government spokesperson Tangi Utikere said Labour would need to look at the implications of the proposal first.

“We are open to looking at how we can make local government work better for everyone, and I think even people within the sector would accept that as well, how we simplify things. That’s where the focus needs to be on right now.”

The Minister of Local Government Simon Watts said the proposals were “absolutely” consistent with National’s advocacy for localism.

But Utikere disagreed.

“The government talks a lot about the need to empower local communities, but they’re looking to strip away what is a key layer of that.”

Utikere said with such long-lasting implications he was disappointed a bipartisan approach was not taken.

“What we want here is a real look at what works for communities, that local voice is part of that conversation, and also that those key sort of areas of environmental protection, public transport, waste, minimisation and management are taken care of.”

Bishop said consultation was open to everybody, and as Labour was part of the “ecosystem” it would get a chance to have its say.

The Green Party’s local government spokesperson, and former Wellington mayor, Celia Wade-Brown believed mayors had a different skill set to regional councils when it came to public transport, environmental protection, harbour management, and monitoring rivers.

“There is a complete disregard for the expertise for both officers and staff and elected members in these proposals. I think most of us think that there needs to be consideration of reform, but this has jumped to the end game of getting rid of regional councils,” she said.

Wade-Brown acknowledged there was a need for new funding models, and a conversation about planned reorganisation, but starting with getting rid of regional councils was not an inviting way to start.

“This is Christopher Luxon talking about localism and doing the opposite.”

The Combined Territories Boards’ plans would still need to uphold Treaty of Waitangi settlement commitment, but there was no requirement for iwi representation.

Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said there were “great relationship agreements” between iwi and regional councils, and she did not want that to change.

“It’ll be really important that it doesn’t sideline the Treaty, and sideline the progress that Māori iwi and communities have achieved within these spaces,” she said.

She also agreed there needed to be a more efficient and effective way to manage the layers of bureaucracy, but said abolishing regional councils was a “direct assault” on Treaty settlements.

“We have to make sure that they’re not removing Māori and iwi from decision making, that they’re not removing environmental protection. And when you centralise power to Cabinet ministers, there’s a political imperative that takes over everything else.”

“It’ll be really important that it doesn’t sideline the Treaty, and sideline the progress that Māori iwi and communities have achieved within these spaces.”

Meanwhile ACT’s local government spokesperson Cameron Luxton called it a “good day for local democracy,” and it would remove overlap.

“For too long we have had territorial councils, regional councils, mayors, local MPs, area ministers and Cabinet all overlapping. People are left wondering who is responsible for what. Voters look at their papers for regional council and see a list of names they do not recognise and shrug their shoulders,” he said.

“Ratepayers don’t know who their regional chair is, but they do know who their mayor is. Under these reforms, they’ll know who to hold to account. By removing a layer of governance, we are making it clearer where responsibility sits.”

The Taxpayers’ Union wanted to see rates relief alongside the announcement.

Spokesperson Tory Relf said the government’s proposals were a “real chance” to cut back bureaucracy and reduce the costs to ratepayers, but would only work if the changes were genuine.

“That can’t mean shifting the same responsibilities and the same staff into district councils and pretending that’s reform. And it certainly can’t mean creating new roles or bodies in a manner that isn’t democratically accountable. Ratepayers need less bureaucracy, not a reshuffle from one layer to another,” she said.

Watts is still expected to bring a policy proposal around rates capping to Cabinet before the end of the year.

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

Senior National MP and minister Chris Bishop has categorically denied plotting a leadership challenge, insisting that Christopher Luxon remains the best person to be prime minister.

Speculation surrounding the prospect of a coup has intensified in the past week given dissatisfaction within the National caucus after a series of worrying polls.

Addressing reporters at Parliament on Tuesday, Bishop said he was “definitely not” planning to roll Luxon as leader and dismissed the commentary as people “interviewing their typewriters”.

Asked if he could give a firm commitment that Luxon would remain prime minister through to the election, Bishop responded simply: “yes”.

Bishop was asked several times whether Luxon was the best person for the top job, to which he said Luxon was “fantastic” and “outstanding”.

He eventually responded directly: “Correct… absolutely, he’s doing a wonderful job as prime minister.”

“We’re in difficult economic times, as I think everybody knows, and this is the first time we’ve had a three-way coalition Cabinet in New Zealand history,” Bishop said.

“That produces its own challenges and trials and tribulations. But he’s doing an excellent job leading a government that is… firmly focused on long term structural reform to drive higher living standards.”

Bishop said he spoke to Luxon “almost every day” including about the rumours.

Earlier on Tuesday, another MP touted as a future leader Erica Stanford shrugged off a question over whether anyone had approached her about potentially taking over.

“All I’m concentrated on… is doing my job,” she said. “I don’t talk to people about leadership.”

Standing alongside Stanford, Luxon said she was doing an “outstanding job” and the National Party had a “great team doing an amazing job”.

Asked whether he would step down if National sunk below a certain level in the polls, Luxon said that was “not a concern”.

He said he did not hold any concerns for those National MPs who would lose their jobs on current polling: “No.”

Speaking on NewstalkZB on Monday, Luxon said he did not believe the rumours and described Bishop as a “great minister” and “good friend”.

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

Wellington City Council could save tens of millions of dollars through cost-cutting, such as reducing staff, according to a new report.

In August, the then-new council chief executive Matt Prosser commissioned independent analysis from Deloitte of the council’s processes, as well as finding opportunities to improve performance and rates affordability.

That report was revealed on Tuesday afternoon, and highlighted issues such as the council’s aging technology, double-handling and ambiguity around the council’s roles and how it differed from central government.

It said through “right shaping” the council workforce and optimising spending through better governance, contract compliance and strategic sourcing, the council could save up to $79 million over three years.

Prosser said some of Deloitte’s recommendations were at odds with the wishes of the community and decisions previously made by the council.

“It’s important we don’t get ahead of the democratic decision processes at the heart of local government.

“We will critically assess everything in the report against the needs and aspirations of our communities.”

He said in the short-term the council would be focused on finding cost savings and making operational improvements.

“Throughout this process our staff will be kept informed, and we will seek their views on the initiatives raised in the report. As is council’s practice, we will also be engaging with the unions.”

The council had removed 58 roles over the past few months, he said.

“We’ve also kicked off a programme to improve our delivery across a number of areas including contract management, procurement and asset management.”

The report said the council had 330 more staff than it should, based on the number of full time employees per 1000 households.

It found that would result in a 18.5 percent reduction in employees and on an average it would save $33.9 million.

‘A flimsy PowerPoint presentation’ – PSA

PSA national secretary Duane Leo said the report was “fundamentally flawed”.

“This is a flimsy PowerPoint presentation that lacks any depth, rigour or even a basic understanding of what the Council’s role is.

“Hidden in the fine print, the report notes that its assumptions need to be validated and shouldn’t be relied upon for decision-making.”

Leo said it was based on crude benchmarking that ignored Wellington City Council provided services many other councils don’t such as social housing, city housing and addressing homelessness.

He said it also did not include that an extra 22,000 people come into the city every day for work.

“You cannot remove one in five positions without serious impacts. Building consent times will blow out. Libraries will have reduced hours. Parks will be less well maintained. Council has already removed 58 roles this year and staff are stretched thin.”

The Deloitte report made note that the council should make more use of AI for tasks such as triaging general enquiry’s from the public, creating reporting on project management and automate workflows.

Leo said the union was concerned about the proposed use of AI.

“Deloitte is assuming AI can deliver productivity gains of up to 50 percent but they haven’t done the work to show replacing experienced staff with ChatGPT would actually deliver those results.”

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