Category: Politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

The new Defence Minister says he has not seen anything in the Iran war that would lead him to reconsider New Zealand’s defence relationship with the United States.

Chris Penk also said the country was not going too slowly on acquiring military drones even though other countries were accelerating by up to 400 percent.

Penk has just taken over the defence, space and spy agency portfolios from Judith Collins.

“It’s exciting and intimidating,” he told RNZ in an interview this week.

He was not setting a different course from his predecessor. “I think we’re on the right path.”

Pope or president?

Penk was less well known than ‘Crusher’ Collins – was he a hawk or dove? He responded only that he would represent government policy “faithfully”.

The Iran war had not made him reconsider the US-NZ defence relationship.

“No, I think we need to understand clearly where our ideals and interests lie. So in that sense, nothing’s changed.

“It’s not to say that we would commit to a particular operation because of US involvement or despite it. We will make decisions on a case-by-case basis in accordance with our long-standing independent foreign policy.”

Did US President Donald Trump’s threat to wipe out Iran’s civilisation discomfort him?

“It’s not language or a policy aim that’s held by the New Zealand government,” said Penk. “So, clearly it’s not something that I am personally, you know, comfortable with in that sense.”

Had the way US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth characterised the war or how the US saw its role in the world prompted any rethink?

“I think we should consider that any interaction or involvement that New Zealand has militarily anywhere in the globe should be on a case-by-case basis according to whether it aligns with our interests and ideals as determined from time to time by our independent foreign policy.”

The Pope’s comments on war had drawn Trump’s ire in recent days. Where did Penk’s sympathies lie?

“I don’t think I should express a view between those two gentlemen, but I think more importantly from New Zealand’s point of view, we’ve got a government position that is that clearly we’re affected by the war in the Middle East and it would be better if it were to cease.”

Hegseth has invoked Christian language to justify the war against Iran.

Penk said his meetings could include one with Hegseth though Australia was the most important relationship, and he would be meeting its Defence Minister Richard Marles shortly in person. Penk was set to meet Marles in Sydney on Thursday, saying “we can do more to operationalise our alliance”.

More drones for some

Marles said last week the Iran and Ukraine wars had in the last two years shown up the need to focus more on drones. Under Canberra’s new national defence strategy, $2.5 billion of new or redirected spending was also going into drones.

Also, the Albanese government on Tuesday said it would more than double investment in counter-drones to up to $9 billion over a decade.

France had just put out a new plan to quadruple its stocks of kamikaze drones by 2030, incentivised by the two wars showing up how fast munitions got drained.

The Pentagon meantime had announced plans to triple US spending on drones and related technology to more than NZ$125 billion.

Was New Zealand moving too slowly?

“I wouldn’t say we’re going too slowly, but we need to keep moving quickly so that we don’t fall behind,” said Penk.

The year-old defence capability plan (DCP) envisaged spending up to about half a billion dollars on air and sea drones by 2029.

What about doubling the drone spend like Australia?

“I think the DCP has the right level of ambition, including that it’s a huge step up from historic New Zealand government investment in defence and security matters.”

Penk added the figures in the plan were a “floor” not a ceiling, the plan would be reviewed every two years and the drone spend could be sped up.

“The relative priority of different technology types, for example, drones as compared with the other needs that we have, is going to be part of the Cabinet’s decision-making in terms of procurement that we make over the next months and years.”

AI and where to get it

Another Cabinet choice would be around military AI.

The Pentagon’s deployment of that in Iran had sped up strikes on targets like never before. When its Department of Defence fell out with AI whiz company Anthropic, it turned instead to the rival Open AI to take over the targeting tech’s development alongside data-king Palantir whose platforms “specialise in integrating vast, siloed sources of data with all elements of decision-making”.

The NZDF is under orders to increase its lethal strike capability. But the country has no local equivalent of Palantir, Anthropic or Open AI.

So how would Penk ensure defence got the AI it might think it needed?

“The important thing with AI is clearly it’s developing very quickly. So we need to be agile,” he said.

“And that means not closing off any options if there are allies, partners, and others whom we work with closely and we trust who are developing this technology.

“If we’re in the space that we’re able to share that in a way that reflects our values and doesn’t breach any international or our own domestic law, then of course we should be open to that.”

He was more interested in understanding how systems and procurement could let defence move quickly rather than any specific AI platforms.

Integration

Speed had been one emphasis; integration had been another especially in US-led military alliances, frameworks and exercises.

Pentagon statements and strategies put great emphasis on integration with companies and with allies; its Space Force had dubbed 2026 the year of integration.

Had Penk sought to understand what the US meant by “integration”?

“I haven’t had that discussion directly, and I don’t know if officials have, in the light of the most recent proclamations by them, but I think in general terms, integration is a good thing to the extent that we can understand and work with those we’ve got good relationships.”

It did not mean being subservient.

“It means that we integrate in a number of different ways as a starting point to understand your intentions, as a helpful way for us to know if there are ways that we can usefully contribute to aims that we share, and where we don’t share aims, then clearly we won’t.”

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 ACT Party leader David Seymour has floated dishing out $500 to every year 11 student for an investment account, to promote investing at a younger age.

It was not an ACT policy “yet”, he said.

Seymour said the idea could be funded by taking about five percent, or $30 million, of the $600 million annual KiwiSaver subsidy – the government’s $260 contribution to people’s KiwiSaver accounts.

“I think most people would say that’s a bargain,” he said.

“For a relatively modest amount of money, we could give a generation a practical introduction to saving, investing, ownership, and financial responsibility.”

Using actual money, rather than a simulator, means students have “skin in the game” and would be more motivated, Seymour said.

The cash would be accompanied by education, including assessments each term, but it was still unclear who might teach it, he said.

Seymour told Checkpoint this was the reason he was floating this as an idea rather than a complete policy.

It could perhaps be a hybrid of online learning, people from the community and homeroom teachers, he said.

“It needn’t take up a huge amount of time but it will get children’s attention and that’s why it has to have real money and real skin in the game, because they have to really want it.”

He told Checkpoint this idea would solve a few problems.

“Most people would agree we’re too into housing compared with productive investment, we have a problem with productivity and wage growth, which manifests itself as concern about the cost of living, and we also I think have a bit of a problem with financial literacy, or at least we could certainly do better on that.”

It was a shot at improving people’s financial literacy.

“Too many young New Zealanders leave school without even a basic understanding of how wealth is created, how capital grows, or how businesses generate value,” Seymour said.

“Changing that requires a change in how the next generation thinks about business and investment. Bluntly, I do not think our current education system is set up to teach this.”

The idea would directly address the country’s poor productivity, he said.

“A generation of savvy, financially literate young Kiwis will increase productivity more drastically than almost anything else.”

It was education rather than a hand out, and people would not be able to take the money and run because there would be controls on the accounts, he said.

Seymour said he would be asking people to give up about $25 per year in order to help the next generation.

“At the moment you get about $500, if it was to become $475, but you knew you were living in a country where the young people, the next generation, had a new appreciation of the value of saving and investing, and that the whole country was going to be weathier as a result of that shift, I think you could probably forgive the effectively $25 a year.”

How it would work

Seymour suggested the process could be supported by platforms like Sharesies or BlackBull, and each student’s investments would progress each term after passing assessments.

In term one they’d choose a term deposit: “a safe investment, but one that introduces the basic idea of storing capital,” Seymour said.

In term two, they would invest in a managed fund to learn about risk, and in term three they could invest in New Zealand equities before moving to global assets in term four.

There were a few options from there, like putting the money directly into a student’s KiwiSaver, adding it as credit to a student loan, or keeping the gains they make above the original $500, in cash.

If they don’t pass the assessments: “you’ve got to keep your money in a term deposit, and the returns won’t be great, but at least you’re safe.”

On Thursday evening Seymour presented the idea to a business crowd at an ANZ event in Christchurch.

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

Shane Jones has apologised after making a jab at the Finance Minister’s weight loss as the coalition ructions shift gears into personal attacks.

The argy bargy between National and New Zealand First first kicked off on Wednesday morning when Winston Peters told RNZ’s Morning Report it would have been “wise” for the Prime Minister to have told him about the motion of confidence vote he was planning to call in National’s caucus meeting on Tuesday.

Christopher Luxon survived the vote but the New Zealand First leader called his decision to even have it a “bad move”, “unprecedented” and suggested it would “have consequences”.

A short time later, National’s deputy leader Nicola Willis told RNZ that Peters was “mischief-making” and that the “risk” with New Zealand First was that the party had a “track record of going with Labour”.

Luxon added to that on Newstalk ZB’s The Country a short time later saying Peters was the person who had put Dame Jacinda Ardern in charge of the country and described New Zealand First and Peters’ own belief system as “anti-immigrant”.

New Zealand First’s deputy leader Shane Jones has gone much further on Thursday, telling reporters on his way into the House that the back and forth between the two parties was simply the “bump and grind of politics”.

When it was put to him that Willis had doubled down on her comments, despite Peters making clear his party would not work with Labour, Jones got personal.

“I dunno, maybe it’s an outcome of losing too much weight, I don’t know,” he told reporters as he walked off to Question Time.

RNZ put that comment to Willis, who had headed off to catch a flight. She said she did not want to comment.

But just an hour after making the remark Jones was back in front of reporters apologising.

“I owe an apology to Nicola Willis, it has been reported that my remarks were not in keeping with what one would expect from a senior parliamentarian.

“I shall be very mindful in answering questions in the future that they don’t have an unnecessary hurtful impact on my colleagues,” he said.

Jones has also personally apologised to Willis, which she has accepted.

It’s the second apology she’s received in 24 hours after Willis took offence to a comment Labour leader Chris Hipkins made in the House on Wednesday afternoon.

Hipkins, during a point of order, said, “I think she may be having a few issues. She may need some medical help”, after Willis made a loud groaning sound.

Willis demanded an apology, which prompted Hipkins to be asked to withdraw the comment, and then outside of the House the pair crossed paths with each other in front of reporters, and Willis again asked for an apology.

Hipkins later in the day got in touch to personally apologise, which she also accepted.

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 Labour Party has confirmed it will support the India-NZ free trade deal, giving National and ACT the required numbers to pass it through Parliament

But Chris Hipkins has warned businesses to proceed at their own risk and do their own due diligence.

“New Zealand businesses need to go into this with their eyes wide open,” the Labour leader said announced support for the deal on Thursday.

“The deal cuts tariffs, and increases market access for New Zealand exporters, and that is very welcome. But the $33 billion investment target is unrealistic and missing it could see benefits clawed back in 15 years.

Trade Minister Todd McClay is set to fly to New Delhi over the long weekend to sign the agreement on Monday.

However, New Zealand First’s firm opposition to the deal means National and ACT require Labour’s support in order to pass legislation to enact parts of the agreement.

Labour and National have been at an impasse for months over the extent of advice being shared about the deal.

An array of exporters and business associations last week issued an open letter calling on all parties to support the deal.

Earlier, Hipkins said he was still waiting for the government to clarify some “issues and inconsistencies”.

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

A home care worker’s calling the government out for alleged double standards over mileage rates paid to MPs.

Earlier this month, home and community support workers were given a temporary boost to their mileage rates – from 63.5 cents to 82.5 cents per kilometre.

Relief teachers also received a similar increase.

But the amount politicians can claim for using their private vehicles for work purposes is considerably higher.

Checkpoint confirmed with Beehive sources that MPs can claim mileage up to 14,000 kilometres a year at an IRD rate of $1.17 cents a kilometre for a petrol car and $1.26 for diesel vehicles.

MP’s spouses can also claim the mileage if the vehicle use is connected to parliamentary work – for example, driving the MP to a meeting.

Napier home support worker, Tamara Baddeley called the difference “bloody disgusting.”

“It’s a total double standard. They are on six-figure salaries to begin with, we are on wages of $25 to $32 an hour,” she said.

She said she would like to see MPs do care workers’ jobs for a month with their pay and allowances.

Checkpoint asked Parliamentary Services for the mileage figures but they wouldn’t supply the amounts paid per kilometre, saying the rates were based on AA reports it couldn’t share.

But the programme confirmed the payments from a claim form that shows IRD rates are used.

Those are calculated at the end of the financial year and new rates are currently being calculated for the year ended 31 March 2026.

IRD said they’ll be available soon and will reflect changes to the cost of fuel up to that date.

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

Winston Peters was doing his best to quell concerns there were ructions in the coalition claiming the government was as stable as a “three-legged stool”.

The New Zealand First leader and both National’s leader and deputy all took turns in their Wednesday morning media slots to launch broadsides on their coalition partner before coming together in the afternoon at Parliament to say all was well and stability ensued.

It was Peters who kicked it off on Morning Report saying it would have been wise for Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to have told him he was planning to have a vote of confidence in his leadership at National’s caucus meeting on Tuesday.

Peters said the action was “unprecedented” and not one he supported, because it would have consequences.

Within an hour deputy leader Nicola Willis was on Morning Report saying Peters had a “track record of picking Labour over National, and that’s the risk you run with them”.

Luxon was next, using his weekly interview on Newstalk ZB’s The Country to say Peters was the person who put Dame Jacinda Ardern in charge of the country.

He accused his foreign affairs minister of trying to “scaremonger” and having an “anti-immigrant bias”.

By early afternoon, the ministers, on their way to Question Time, one-by-one declared the coalition was as strong as ever, while taking the opportunity for a potshot here and there.

Luxon said he didn’t need to tell Peters he was calling a motion of confidence in National’s caucus, because it wasn’t important enough to warrant it.

Peters’ argument was that under the no-surprises policy of the coalition agreement it would have been “wise” for Luxon to have given him a heads-up.

In response to that Luxon said, “Well, I just say Winston Peters isn’t backing an Indian FTA that’s delivering billions of dollars to the New Zealand people, and as a result, I don’t take all of his advice.”

Luxon added the two parties together with ACT delivered “strong stable government” and in the case of Peters, “we cooperate where we can and we differ where we must”.

Peters told reporters on his way into the House that he wasn’t worrying about Willis and Luxon saying there was a risk New Zealand First could go with Labour.

“We are actually just getting on and doing our job.”

On him having put Ardern into power, he said: “yeah I put Jim Bolger in power too, I put National in power. I put Helen Clark in power. I mean at the end of the day, it the deal that we did and we kept our word”.

He said the suggestion he was “anti-immigrant” was a “nonsense”.

And on whether he was a “mischief-maker” as Willis had claimed, Peters got the giggles as he declared, “I’ve been a most responsible son and boy doing my best all my young age – to call me a mischief-maker, that’s an outrage”.

Just across from him, Willis was at the same time doubling down on her earlier comments telling media it was a “statement of fact” that in 2017 “given the choice to support a strong National-lead government they chose to make Jacinda Ardern Prime Minister”.

“That’s a fact of history, and I’m simply reminding people of that fact.”

She added, when it came to New Zealand First you “won’t always get what’s written on the tin”.

The other coalition partner in all this, ACT, has for the most part stayed out of the tit-for-tat sledging.

Leader and deputy prime minister David Seymour did weigh in on whether New Zealand First might go with Labour though, saying, “it can be a bit of a lucky dip…but right now we are in a coalition, and we’re fixing what matters for New Zealanders”.

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 chief whip Stuart Smith has finally addressed media at Parliament, denying reports that he had tried to alert the Prime Minister to flagging caucus support prior to Easter.

The public denial comes after a similar written statement was issued on Tuesday, four days after the story was first reported by the New Zealand Herald.

Before that, Smith had repeatedly refused to talk to media. He was also absent from National’s critical caucus meeting on Tuesday due to a “long-standing personal appointment”. During that meeting, Luxon called and won a motion of confidence in his leadership.

Speaking on Wednesday, Smith insisted that at no point had he attempted to contact Christopher Luxon about discontent in the caucus.

He also denied ever being handed a letter to pass on to Luxon regarding his support.

Smith declined, however, to say whether any MPs had ever raised concerns with him about Luxon’s leadership.

“I don’t discuss anything that goes on with caucus members and the whips’ office. That’s totally confidential,” he said.

“People come to me with lots of things, and they are between me and them.”

Asked why he did not publicly deny the NZ Herald report until Tuesday morning, Smith said: “I didn’t feel it was appropriate.”

He said he also did not feel as if he needed to contact Luxon directly, but revealed he had spoken to his chief of staff Cameron Burrows on Friday.

Smith refused to reveal the nature of that conversation: “That remains between him and I”.

Talking to reporters on Wednesday, Luxon said he retained “total confidence” in Smith as chief whip.

Asked for further comment, Luxon cut off questions: “If you want to talk about things outside the beltway that actually connect to New Zealanders and what’s interesting to them, rather than what may be interesting to you in the beltway and the bubble of Wellington, let’s have that conversation.”

Smith’s written statement on Tuesday was issued by the Prime Minister’s office.

“I did want to confirm that I did not contact the Prime Minister or his office seeking a meeting,” the statement said.

“I am disappointed by recent speculative media coverage. The Prime Minister has my full support.”

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 prime minister has unleashed on his coalition partner Winston Peters, saying he was the person who put Dame Jacinda Ardern in charge of the country.

In an interview with Newstalk ZB’s The Country, Christopher Luxon shot back at Peters, who earlier told RNZ he should have been given a heads-up about Tuesday’s vote of confidence at National’s caucus meeting.

Luxon has accused his foreign affairs minister of trying to “scaremonger” and having an “anti-immigrant bias” within New Zealand First and his own belief system.

Peters described the vote of confidence as a bad move, unprecedented, and warned there will be further consequences.

‘Track record’

National’s deputy leader Nicola Willis also launched a broadside, saying he has a “track record of picking Labour over National, and that’s the risk you run with him”.

She took aim at her coalition partner after he earlier told RNZ Luxon was wrong to not warn him of Tuesday’s motion of confidence under the no-surprises clause in the coalition agreement.

The comments from both senior ministers on RNZ’s Morning Report signalled the election campaign has well and truly begun, with Willis also saying Peters was “mischief-making”.

This comes after Luxon took the extraordinary move of calling a motion of confidence in himself at Tuesday’s caucus meeting, following intense media speculation about his position.

While he was successful, the prime minister refused to take questions about it afterwards or say if it was unanimous.

Asked on Morning Report if he should have been warned ahead of the vote, NZ First leader, Winston Peters, said: “It would have been wise to yes, of course.”

“In plain ambit of human relations and cooperation, the answer is of course, yes.”

Peters, whose parliamentary career began in the 1970s, said it was an “unprecedented” move from a sitting prime minister, and not one he supported.

“Because you see, you can tell when the next one’s going to happen. Not initiated by himself, but by others, and just wait for the next round of polls. And that’s the sad thing.

“I mean, this is unprecedented… there are going to be consequences. They’re seriously predictable consequences. But what I was astonished by was that they didn’t seem to understand, sadly, what they were doing. And here we are, part of the coalition, where stability of government all the way to the 2026 election and beyond is the critical component. And this is not helpful.”

Asked if he was essentially telling the National Party – which unlike NZ First, has been sliding in the polls – to get its act together, Peters said: “Well, you’ve phrased it that way, but I don’t disagree with you.”

Peters said a leadership spill would not have voided the NZ First-National coalition agreement, but that it would need to be “reshaped” – and warned National MPs against trying it again.

“You don’t sit here with all your responsibilities without looking at possible scenarios playing out and looking at every alternative. And if it’s like an octopus, the decision-making conclusion’s like an octopus with eight legs – you better understand all eight possible legs, not just three of them, five of them… You’ve got too many people with too little experience giving their views about what the outcome should be. That’s tragic.

Peters said it was important the government get back to the basics of governing “as fast as possible”.

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 Green Party has confirmed its candidate list for the election, with some current MPs bumped up slightly compared to an earlier draft.

That initial list was put together by delegates, to then be voted on by the wider party membership, then reviewed and approved for publication by a group of party representatives.

The final version has Lan Pham leapfrogging Parliamentary colleagues Hūhana Lyndon and Lawrence Xu-Nan.

After the draft in March also had Steve Abel – ranked 9th for the 2023 election – dropping down to 14th, he is now back up to 12th, swapping places with former Environment Canterbury chairperson Craig Aaron Pauling.

Lawyer and Treaty of Waitangi activist Tania Waikato – who put herself forward to represent Te Pāti Māori’s co-leaders and MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke at the Privileges Committee after the Treaty Principles Bill haka – has moved up two spots to 13th.

That is a critical spot at this point with the most recent public poll – by Verian for 1News – projecting 13 seats for the Greens with 11 percent of the vote.

Scott Willis, who came into Parliament at 12th, was ranked by delegates at 16th but has risen to 15th in the final list.

Their elevation comes at the expense of Auckland Pride co-chair Bhen Goodsir, who has dropped from 13th in the draft to 17th.

Mike Davidson, who entered Parliament at 19th after the resignation of Benjamin Doyle, has returned to that spot after the draft list had him at 22nd.

Heather Te Au-Skipworth – who quit Te Pāti Māori after being replaced for candidacy of the Ikaroa-Rāwhiti seat in 2023 by her cousin Meka Whaitiri, who had jumped ship from Labour – has dropped from 19th to 21st.

Two candidates – Asher Wilson-Goldman and Nathan Hoturoa Gray – have also withdrawn their names, with the party saying this was for personal reasons.

The Greens list for 2026 election (with changes since the draft):

1. Marama Davidson

2. Chlöe Swarbrick

3. Teanau Tuiono

4. Tamatha Paul

5. Julie Anne Genter

6. Lan Pham (up two from 8)

7. Hūhana Melanie Lyndon (down one from 6)

8. Lawrence Xu-Nan (down one from 7)

9. Ricardo Menéndez March

10. Francisco Hernandez

11. Kahurangi Carter

12. Steve Abel (up two from 14)

13. Tania Waikato (up two from 15)

14. Craig Aaron Pauling (down two from 12)

15. Scott Willis (up one from 16)

16. Rohan O’Neill-Stevens (up one from 17)

17. Bhen Goodsir (down four from 13)

18. Yasmine Serhan

19. Louise Hutt (up one from 20)

20. Mike Davidson (up two from 22)

21. Heather Hinemoa Te Au-Skipworth (down two from 19)

22. Shreejan Pandey (down one from 21)

23. Lauren Craig (up four from 27)

24. Zephyr Brown

25. Josh Jacobsen (up one from 26)

26. Angela Dalton (down one from 25)

27. Alika Wells (up four from 31)

28. Carl Morgan

29. Courtney White (up three from 32)

30. Te Whatanui Kipa Leka Taumalolo Skipwith

31. Awhi Haenga (up two from 33)

32. Melody Willis (up five from 37)

33. Pamela Grealey (up one from 34)

34. Alma de Anda (up one from 35)

35. Chris Norton (up one from 36)

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 says it is shifting oversight of infrastructure projects from Treasury to the independent Infrastructure Commission.

It’s part of several changes to the investment management system, which informs how the government selects infrastructure projects.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis said they’re making the move to ensure proper scrutiny of major projects to help ministers make good investments.

“Since coming into government, the Minister for Infrastructure and I have been concerned by the quality of information provided on infrastructure, including what we own and its condition, the forward investment pipeline, assurance on projects, and agency performance,” she said.

Willis said that as it stood, there were multiple project review tools in use, “but none of them do what is needed”.

“None of these tools provide Ministers with unapologetically strong, clear, and actionable assurance that is focused on substance as opposed to bureaucracy, so that we can make well-informed investment decisions.

“What ministers need is clear, frankly expressed ‘go/no go’ expert advice on each project.”

Willis said bad projects gain momentum until it’s too late, wasting tens or hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.

The changes would ensure the better use of the Infrastructure Commission’s expertise in determining whether investments meet a need, represent value for money, and are deliverable, according to a statement from Willis and Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop.

There would also be greater Ministerial oversight of major projects, with the Infrastructure and Investment Ministers’ Group reviewing high-profile, high-risk investments before they go to Cabinet.

Bishop said the changes are direct acceptances of some of the National Infrastructure Plan’s recommendations.

He said they would benefit both ministers and taxpayers with “roads that last, schools and hospitals that meet needs, and projects that are delivered on time and on budget.”

Last month, the Commission laid out its “affordable” plan to tackle the country’s infrastructure woes.

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