Category: Politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

Winston Peters says he should have been warned ahead of Christopher Luxon’s leadership vote this week.

Christopher Luxon said there had been intense media speculation about his position, and Tuesday’s ballot would put things to rest.

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, the NZ First leader 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.

“And I can go back to a former time when leadership lasted far longer because parties realised, ‘Hang on, we’ve got to this point, we have to stay solid with our first decisions rather than changing like a yo-yo,’ which you’ve seen in New Zealand in recent times.”

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

“Our job is to provide stability for the New Zealand people who are fighting petrol price rises, fuel price, supermarket, power pricing. That’s what New Zealanders are concerned about.”

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

Modelling done for the government on its plans for an LNG terminal did not consider the effect of an international price spike, documents show.

A climate advocate said the decision not to model price volatility was “remarkable” and raised further questions about whether the planned facility was a good idea.

However, officials said although the current conflict in the Middle East had created volatility in LNG prices, longer-term price projections were still in line with the information the government based its decision on.

The government announced in February it would proceed with plans for a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility in Taranaki, with the billion-dollar plus cost paid for through an electricity levy.

The proposal, widely criticised at the time, has attracted renewed opposition after Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz prompted the price of fossil fuels – including LNG – to spike.

Gentailer chief executives expressed doubts at the energy sector’s conference last month, prompting Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to say the government would not proceed if the business case did not stack up.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) said in a statement last month that the LNG terminal was selected from a shortlist of five options that it considered “timely, feasible and of sufficient scale to meet dry year needs”.

It would also be beneficial to major industrial gas users, who had been forced to limit production or shut up shop altogether in recent years as domestic gas supply dwindled, the ministry said.

The announcement had already had an effect on the prices electricity suppliers were paying for supply later this year, MBIE said.

“While forward prices will move around in response to a range of factors, electricity forward prices dropped substantially in the weeks following the government’s LNG announcement.”

Documents released to RNZ under the Official Information Act outline how consultants contracted by the ministry modelled the effect of an LNG facility on New Zealand energy prices.

The variables they tested included whether two or three coal- and diesel-burning Rankine turbines at Huntly are working over winter, how fast future renewable generation is built, and whether a private joint venture to build gas storage beneath the Tariki gas field in Taranaki goes ahead.

The model tested various scenarios with two international LNG prices: $20 and $25 per gigajoule.

It did not look at any higher pricing.

“[This] modelling has not considered the potential impact of international fuel price volatility,” the document said.

Undertaken before the current fuel crisis, the modelling said that, at the moment, New Zealand’s electricity system was currently “relatively insulated” from international energy prices.

That had been beneficial when international prices, especially LNG, spiked during 2021 and 2023 – when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine affected supply.

International natural gas prices have now increased again, after Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz, and Goldman Sachs recently said prices could increase by another 50 to 100 percent if the conflict with Israel and the US dragged on.

Lawyers for Climate Action executive director Jessica Palairet said the modelling reinforced “real questions about whether the LNG import facility is going to deliver”.

“The analysis did not consider the risk of international LNG price … which is quite remarkable.”

The model also assumed that supply of LNG would be unlimited and uninterrupted, an assumption that was being tested by the current situation, she said.

An MBIE spokesperson said the current conflict had created only “short-term volatility” in LNG markets,

“LNG futures prices for 2028/2029 remain consistent with the price assumptions that fed into earlier Cabinet analysis on LNG,” they said.

“Importantly, events in the Middle East do not impact the cost of the LNG import facility itself, nor the benefits of having reliable dry year cover in New Zealand.”

The modelling documents showed that having access to LNG had the greatest effect on New Zealand’s electricity system in scenarios where electricity demand was much greater than supply, the Tariki gas storage project did not go ahead, and LNG prices were low.

“If LNG is significantly higher priced than NZ gas, LNG will likely result in cost,” the documents said.

Savings were also much lower when supply and demand was in balance, and if there was additional gas storage available through Tariki – which emails between officials and consultants concluded would have a “high impact”.

An agreement to develop the Tariki project was signed by NZ Energy Corp and Genesis late last year, and early work has begun.

A Genesis spokesperson said there was no timeline yet for “this potential project”.

Significant parts of the documents were redacted, including the introductory pages of the final presentation outlining the results.

Jessica Palairet said what appeared to have been redacted was the full executive summary, including any conclusions the Concept Consulting consultants – who she said were “rell-regarded” – had drawn from the modelling.

“We don’t have the interpretation of the consultants of their own modelling, In some ways, they’re … the most important information in the entire analysis.”

“What’s been redacted appears to be what the modellers actually thought about their model.”

MBIE said those sections of the document, along with multiple smaller redactions, were held back to prevent the “free and frank exchange of opinions”.

Official Information laws allow for such redactions, provided that they are not outweighed by the public interest.

Palairet – who also received a redacted version of the same documents – said her organisation was challenging that decision with the Ombudsman.

“There’s a really strong public interest in releasing the full document. We’re talking about a huge expenditure in the middle of an energy crisis.”

RNZ has laid a separate complaint with the Ombudsman, asking for the redactions to be reconsidered.

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

Analysis: Without probably realising it the Prime Minister has just put more pressure than ever on himself to perform and lift his party polling.

By calling a formal motion of confidence vote in caucus on Tuesday morning, the caucus were presented with a ‘back him or dump him’ option and chose to back him.

But in backing him there is an expectation that the National Party do better, and that includes the Prime Minister.

Yet, in recent months self-reflection has been missing from Christopher Luxon’s comments – instead he’s concentrated on the party needing to do better.

New Zealand is still a country where a large number of people vote based on personalities and the popularity of a leader goes a long way to securing a party vote.

Luxon almost got to a point of reflecting on his own weaknesses in his Monday morning media round when he acknowledged not everyone would want to invite him to a barbecue.

He’s not John Key, and he seemed to have finally realised that, yet after confirming the confidence of his caucus on Tuesday he then fronted media and single-handedly blamed “speculation and rumour” and a “media soap opera” for the position he had found himself in.

There’s always room in those moments for a bit of self-deprecation and reflection, and it would have gone a long way toward acknowleding those in the caucus and wider party who have been questioning Luxon’s leadership.

Those people exist whether Luxon chooses to believe it or not, but instead of letting them know he had heard them by publicly saying he too needed to improve his personal performance, he blamed others.

By blaming the media reports he’s by extension blaming those MPs who felt they had no choice but to talk to journalists about how bad things had got.

National’s campaign chair Simeon Brown told RNZ on his way into that caucus meeting that MPs who were leaking to the media should either stop, or quit the party.

Senior MP Mark Mitchell told RNZ the caucus was a safe and comfortable place for MPs to air their concerns and be heard. He said caucus was where robust discussion could take place.

However, it’s clear some MPs haven’t felt safe to raise concerns, or have been shot down when they have. Senior whip Stuart Smith appears to be one of those people.

Multiple media outlets, including RNZ, have confirmed the reports originally published in the NZ Herald on Friday morning that Smith had unsuccessfully tried to contact Luxon ahead of Easter to speak to him about caucus concerns over his leadership, but that Luxon had effectively ghosted him.

On Tuesday morning ahead of the caucus vote Smith, via the prime minister’s office, provided a written statement saying he wouldn’t be at the caucus meeting due to a “longstanding personal appointment”.

He said he didn’t contact the Prime Minister or his office “seeking a meeting” and that he was “disappointed by recent speculative media coverage”.

Smith’s statement and denials needed to have landed on Friday if he and Luxon wanted them to be believed.

It’s not credible to wait four days to put out that statement, especially when nobody from the prime minister’s office has disputed the story in the interim.

The statement read as if it had been written by the prime minister’s office and when Brown was asked whether he or the prime minister had put pressure on Smith to make that statement, he refused to answer the question multiple times.

The relationship between the senior whip and the prime minister, and by extension his office, is pivotal. It’s Smith’s job to keep Luxon and his chief of staff abreast of caucus morale and any issues that crop up.

Luxon confirmed on Monday neither he nor his office had contacted Smith since the story broke on Friday morning, which shows the traditional closeness of that relationship doesn’t exist in this caucus.

It’s unclear whether Smith had planned to be at Parliament on Tuesday, and was told not to bother turning up – he hasn’t returned RNZ’s calls.

Smith may have lost the prime minister’s trust at this point, and if he had been at caucus he would have, as senior whip, been tasked with the job of scrutineer alongside his junior, Suze Redmayne.

That would have meant Smith would have been one of just two people to know how many in the caucus supported Luxon. In his absence party president Sylvia Wood counted the votes with Redmayne.

The next caucus vote could end up being for a replacement senior whip.

Luxon made the right call holding the vote on his leadership. His error was not doing it sooner.

The speculation around his job security has been going on for months and the party has been hurt in the polls because he didn’t stem the blood loss sooner.

Now that he’s called the vote, and won it, he is relying on his caucus backing him and keeping any concerns they have in the coming six months either to themselves, or airing them in the privacy of caucus meetings.

It’s a big gamble and if the leaks start again then Luxon has set a precedent and could find himself repeating a confidence vote before the year is out.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has already warned of those consequences, and he would know having seen the inner workings of the National Party for himself in a former life.

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 survived a confidence vote and will remain in charge of the National Party.

Emerging from a caucus meeting which lasted nearly three hours, Christopher Luxon read a short statement to say there had been intense media speculation about his leadership, and “who said what to whom,” and so he forced the vote to put it to rest.

The New Zealand First leader Winston Peters meanwhile, expected there would be “consequences” to the confidence vote.

Describing the conversation as “good and honest,” Luxon said the vote confirmed what he had been saying.

“I have the support of my caucus as their leader. Caucus has answered clearly and decisively. It has backed my leadership, and that matter is now closed.”

Luxon said if media continued to ask him about “speculation and rumour” he would not engage.

“Kiwis expect the media to ask us the tough questions about our policies, to hold us to account for our pledges to New Zealanders, and to interrogate us about the things that matter to them. They are not interested in the media soap opera,” Luxon said.

Following his two-minute long statement, Luxon walked away without taking questions.

It meant his caucus colleagues were left having to answer how the vote went, including whether or not it was unanimous.

National’s deputy leader Nicola Willis said by convention, the party held a secret ballot, with anonymous votes.

Only the scrutineers knew the result, and they were not allowed to reveal the numbers to the leadership or to the caucus.

Describing the result as “emphatic,” Willis said the vote would not have passed without a majority.

“One for all, all for one. And when the caucus, by majority, have confidence in the leader, then we all stand together, backing the leader. That is the decision the caucus made emphatically today,” she said.

“There can be nothing more definitive than the leader going to his caucus, asking them, ‘I would like to give you the opportunity to express whether you have confidence in my leadership,’ receiving a clear majority from the caucus and the caucus backing him.”

Some MPs said they supported Luxon, without revealing whether or not their support translated into a vote.

Referencing the “tikanga” of caucus, Tama Potaka said he would not divulge what happened in caucus.

“It’s like when you and I go on a rugby tour. What goes on tour, stays on tour.”

Northcote MP Dan Bidois described the conversation as “cathartic” but he did not know if the vote was unanimous, while Napier MP Katie Nimon said she was “100 percent behind our prime minister” but would not say if she voted for him.

Others, like Cameron Brewer, Mark Mitchell, Vanessa Weenink, and Todd McClay were more forthcoming in saying they had voted for Luxon.

Senior minister Chris Bishop also voted in support of the Prime Minister, and described the conversation in caucus as “good, honest and robust.”

Bishop said National needed to stop talking about itself, and instead focus on the country in the middle of a fuel crisis.

“I think what the Prime Minister was saying, which I would broadly agree with, is that the country has very difficult challenges ahead of it and we should spend our time focused on those challenges.”

Defence minister Chris Penk said it was “really good to have a conversation and a lot of clarity, which as far as I was concerned we had in any case.”

The party’s junior whip, Suze Redmayne, also confirmed she had voted in support of Luxon, but what happened in caucus was private.

National’s senior whip, Stuart Smith, was absent from the caucus meeting, with the Prime Minister’s office releasing a statement on his behalf explaining he had a longstanding personal commitment.

Speculation over Luxon’s leadership had reignited on Friday after the New Zealand Herald reported Luxon had been evading Smith, who had been trying to tell him his support in the caucus was flagging.

Luxon, on Monday, said he was unaware of this, while Smith’s statement described the coverage as “speculative” and the prime minister had his support.

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

Willis said she spoke to Smith regularly, and last spoke to him on Monday.

“I said to him, ‘what’s all this palaver about you having asked for a meeting with the PM? Is that the case? If so, I missed it?’ And he said no, no I didn’t.”

Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said he was pleased to see his coalition partner was “stable” and was “drawing a line under any trouble they may have had.”

Seymour said the government had a lot of work to do through the fuel crisis, and trust in the media would increase if more questions were asked about that.

Peters said it was “not good,” and the public was entitled to expect stability in a government.

“This is a horrible distraction. We’ve got some serious issues, internationally occasioned, which is not our fault, and we’ve got to deal with them instead of wasting our time on this sort of stuff.”

Later, on his way out of the House, Peters said it was a “very bad” move.

“There’s always inevitable consequences. This is not the first time it’s going to happen, you see.”

Meanwhile, Labour leader Chris Hipkins said National should “absolutely” reveal the caucus vote.

“I think you have an obligation to demonstrate that the Prime Minister still enjoys majority support of the House of Representatives,” he said.

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said she was not interested in a “rearranging of the deck chairs” and was instead interested in changing the government.

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

Follow updates in our live blog above.

Christopher Luxon will remain Prime Minister and National leader after surviving a confidence vote in caucus that he says he himself put forward.

National MPs have met for more than two hours amid rumblings from some about Luxon’s performance.

It followed poor ratings in recent polls.

Speaking after the vote, Luxon said there has been intense media speculation about him.

“I moved a formal motion of confidence in my leadership. That motion was passed, confirming what I have been saying. I have the support of my caucus as their leader,” he said.

Nicola Willis said the vote was a secret ballot, with anonymous votes – and that the numbers have not been revealed to the leadership or caucus.

Luxon said there was a good and honest discussion in caucus.

He did not take questions from media – and said the matter was now closed.

“If the media want to keep focusing on speculation and rumour I am not going to engage.”

Follow the latest with RNZ’s liveblog at the top of this page.

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

MPs are back in rainy Wellington for a two-week sitting block after a fortnight in their electorates during the Easter school holidays.

This week’s parliamentary business centres on the Annual Review Debate, with the addition of Treaty settlement bills, and bills returning from select committee, with an extra sitting on Thursday morning (9am rather than 2pm) in order to fit everything in.

Arguing about past spending

A part of Parliament’s odyssey of financial scrutiny, the Annual Review Debate takes place every year as one of the final stages in the retrospective review of government performance against budget allocations made over a year ago.

MPs have ten hours of debate in which to interrogate government ministers sector by sector, following earlier scrutiny at select committee hearings, another cog in the financial scrutiny cycle.

All of Tuesday and Wednesday’s sitting hours (other than Question Time and Wednesday’s General Debate) are dedicated to the Annual Review debate.

The debate acts as the committee stage of the Appropriation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill, so the process largely mirrors a standard committee stage format.

Across Tuesday’s sitting, MPs will scrutinise relevant ministers in the heavyweight sectors of finance, transport, and housing, followed by health, education, and workplace relations and safety after the dinner break.

On Wednesday, the House begins with a general debate, when MPs can take a lash at issues not tied to any particular piece of parliamentary business or legislation.

After an hour, the House returns to the Annual Review debate, covering energy, social development and employment, the environment (each roughly an hour), then climate change, Pacific peoples, and Māori development (about half an hour each).

Treaty Settlement Bills

Aside from the Annual Review, the other notable business this week includes two claims settlement bills concerning Ngāti Rāhiri Tumutumu (second reading and committee stage) and Ngāti Tara Tokanui (committee stage).

Treaty Claim settlement bills take years to come to fruition beginning with lengthy negotiations between iwi and the Crown. The legislation forms the statutory leg of settlements addressing historical breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi by the Crown.

These bills include accounts of the Crown’s actions and resulting grievances, along with an official apology and details of redress. When debating Treaty bills, MPs typically put aside the usual political approach to debating, and acknowledge these histories and speak to the specifics of financial and cultural redress as set out in the legislation.

MPs debate many bills to relatively sparse public gallery, but the importance of claims settlement bills means iwi, hapū, and whānau travel to Wellington to witness the passage of their bill in person – especially the final third reading. To mark the moment, the Speaker grants permission for waiata when the bill passes.

The Ngāti Rāhiri Tumutumu Claims Settlement Bill will receive its second reading on Thursday morning and its committee stage later in the day. The Ngāti Tara Tokanui Claims Settlement Bill will then move to its committee stage.

Other odds and ends bills

Thursday will also see a range of stages across a hodgepodge of bills, most returning to the House from select committee.

The Building and Construction Sector (Self-certification by Plumbers and Drainlayers) Amendment Bill returns from the Transport and Infrastructure Committee this week. It aims to remove some of the bureaucratic hurdles involved in plumbing and drainlaying work.

The Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill is a technical piece of legislation that updates regulatory systems across the transport, maritime, and aviation sectors. Given its nature, it is relatively uncontroversial and should move smoothly through the House.

The Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (Supervisor, Levy, and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, aside from being a mouthful, is in the name of ACT’s Nicole McKee. It strengthens some of the regulatory systems used by government agencies enforcing anti-money laundering and financial crime laws. All three opposition parties supported this Bill at first reading, but both Labour and the Greens signalled that their continued support was not guaranteed, so the second reading will reveal whether this remains the case.

The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill is one of the government’s legislative attempts to curb rising council rates. To do so, it lays out purposes for local government and prioritises the provision of core services (water, rubbish collection etc). This bill is likely to be contentious as it would restricts what a council can and should do to quite specific and practical functions.

Finally, the Online Casino Gambling Amendment Bill receives its third reading this week and will likely become law by next Monday. It introduces a licensing regime for gambling platforms wanting to operate in New Zealand.

*RNZ’s The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament’s Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ.

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

Shane Jones says his parliamentary colleagues have told him to tone down his language but says he gets “cut-through on debates by deploying hyperbole” like calling Indians coming to New Zealand a “butter chicken tsunami”.

The prime minister said the comments in relation to New Zealand signing a free trade agreement with India are unhelpful – but stopped short of saying whether he thought they were racist.

New Zealand First does not support the India FTA, meaning National needs Labour’s support to pass it through the House.

In a video circulating online, the New Zealand First deputy leader said his party would “never accept” the FTA, and that “unfettered immigration” would drive down the value of wages, clog up roads, and overwhelm the health system.

“I don’t care how much criticism we get. I am just never going to agree with a butter chicken tsunami coming to New Zealand,” Jones said.

On Tuesday morning, Jones told reporters on his way into Parliament that immigration would be a key issue this election year and it is his view that “immigration has been snuck into the free trade deal in a way that does not reflect the expectations of Kiwis”.

He said he didn’t want to “cross words with the prime minister” but disagrees with his characterisation of what the FTA will and won’t do.

“I just say to the prime minister that New Zealanders are not going to tolerate unfettered immigration, ruining our foundation culture and clogging our services at a time we can hardly afford to upgrade the infrastructure that New Zealand has.

“The media will never cancel the Dalmatian Māori because he uses hyperbole and dismiss it as racism. Kiwis are flocking to my cause. Immigration, unfettered, unmitigated, has had a lot of negative impacts,” Jones said.

The senior Cabinet minister acknowledged some MPs had told him to tone the language down.

“There have been various members of the Parliament who have said: ‘Oh, come on, Jonesy. We know you like your one liners, but can you just taiho and talk in a far more prosaic term’,” he said.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins told Morning Report earlier that the comments were “racist at the least” and called on Luxon to be stronger in his language.

Speaking to media shortly before midday he added that if he were Prime Minister he would not put up with Shane Jones’ “racist” comments.

Jones said in an online video he would never agree with a “butter chicken tsunami” coming to New Zealand as a result of the India Free Trade agreement, which his party does not support.

“There is no room for racist rhetoric in any government that I lead,” said Hipkins.

“Any ministers who walk down that road will find that they won’t be ministers for very long.”

At his post cabinet media conference on Monday, Luxon said he had not seen Jones’ comments, but thought they were a “gross misrepresentation” of what the FTA was about.

“I don’t know. I’m just saying the immigration story that they are scaremongering around is absolutely false. We have taken them through the data, we have taken them through the details of that deal. We’ll continue to do so, because we would love them to rethink their position,” Luxon said.

“I appreciate they’ve got a pretty hard no against anything around free trade agreements. I just think that makes New Zealand poorer.”

Pushed on whether he thought Jones’ comments were racist, Luxon said it “doesn’t sound right”, and it was “alarmist” and “unhelpful” language.

“You can call it racist, you know, the colourful language from Shane Jones, we’re used to Shane Jones doing lots of oratorial flourishes as he is prone to do. But the bottom line for me is he’s wrong. There is not going to be an influx of immigration. This deal is well thought through.”

Luxon said he appreciated New Zealand First had its own position on the FTA, but that the position was “frankly wrong”.

“It creates huge opportunity for people that I would have thought New Zealand First would have cared about. Foresters, aquaculture, our farmers, our horticulturalists. This is a great deal.”

Standing next to Luxon, Immigration Minister Erica Stanford said the comments were “not helpful.”

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

Follow updates in our live blog above.

The prime minister says he has the full support of his caucus, as National MPs gather for the first time in weeks.

Parliament’s first sitting day since 2 April comes after a 1News-Verian poll showing the government would be out of power, and a New Zealand Herald report the prime minister had evaded National’s chief whip, who was trying to tell him that caucus support was flagging.

Christopher Luxon has denied he was avoiding Stuart Smith, and was unaware he had been trying to get in touch.

As they arrived at Wellington Airport ahead of a Cabinet meeting on Monday, ministers Mark Mitchell, Simeon Brown, Chris Penk, and Paul Goldsmith all defended Luxon.

Chris Bishop, Todd McClay, and Nicola Willis have also put their support behind Luxon in interviews in recent days, while Erica Stanford, stood next to Luxon at the post-Cabinet media conference, said she had not had any conversations with caucus colleagues about whether Luxon should stay on as prime minister.

On Monday morning, Luxon told Newstalk ZB there were “probably five people” that were “moaning and frustrated”, a number he later walked back on by Monday afternoon.

The number, Luxon insisted, was in response to media reports he had seen.

Responding to the polling numbers and his personal approval ratings, Luxon was “absolutely” confident he would still be prime minister after the caucus meeting.

Follow the latest with RNZ’s liveblog at the top of this page.

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

Follow updates in our live blog above.

The prime minister says he has the full support of his caucus, as National MPs gather in Wellington for the first time in nearly three weeks.

Parliament’s first sitting day since 2 April comes after a 1News-Verian poll showing the government would be out of power, and a New Zealand Herald report the prime minister had evaded National’s chief whip, who was trying to tell him that caucus support was flagging.

Christopher Luxon has denied he was avoiding Stuart Smith, and was unaware he had been trying to get in touch.

As they arrived at Wellington Airport ahead of a Cabinet meeting on Monday, ministers Mark Mitchell, Simeon Brown, Chris Penk, and Paul Goldsmith all defended Luxon.

Chris Bishop, Todd McClay, and Nicola Willis have also put their support behind Luxon in interviews in recent days, while Erica Stanford, stood next to Luxon at the post-Cabinet media conference, said she had not had any conversations with caucus colleagues about whether Luxon should stay on as prime minister.

On Monday morning, Luxon told Newstalk ZB there were “probably five people” that were “moaning and frustrated”, a number he later walked back on by Monday afternoon.

The number, Luxon insisted, was in response to media reports he had seen.

Responding to the polling numbers and his personal approval ratings, Luxon was “absolutely” confident he would still be prime minister after the caucus meeting.

Follow the latest with RNZ’s liveblog at the top of this page.

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 says he has the full support of his caucus, as National MPs gather in Wellington for the first time in nearly three weeks.

Parliament’s first sitting day since 2 April comes after a 1News-Verian poll showing the government would be out of power, and a New Zealand Herald report the prime minister had evaded National’s chief whip, who was trying to tell him that caucus support was flagging.

Christopher Luxon has denied he was avoiding Stuart Smith, and was unaware he had been trying to get in touch.

“He hasn’t reached out to me. There has been no engagement with Stuart Smith from my office or with him,” Luxon said.

The pair were together in North Canterbury last Tuesday and Luxon said it was not raised, and he had not spoken with Smith over the weekend either.

“If there’s any issues that he had, he would have raised them with me,” Luxon said.

“I talk to my backbenchers all the time. I was with a number of them over the course of the weekend at a number of events. I reassure you, I have the confidence of my caucus, period.”

As they arrived at Wellington Airport ahead of a Cabinet meeting on Monday, ministers Mark Mitchell, Simeon Brown, Chris Penk, and Paul Goldsmith all defended Luxon.

Chris Bishop, Todd McClay, and Nicola Willis have also put their support behind Luxon in interviews in recent days, while Erica Stanford, stood next to Luxon at the post-Cabinet media conference, said she had not had any conversations with caucus colleagues about whether Luxon should stay on as prime minister.

“I think he’s doing an exceptional…” she began to say, before Luxon cut her off to ask if anyone had any other questions.

On Monday morning, Luxon told Newstalk ZB there were “probably five people” that were “moaning and frustrated”, a number he later walked back on by Monday afternoon.

The number, Luxon insisted, was in response to media reports he had seen.

“My comment was just in reaction to your media reporting quoting a number of sources that you said you had.”

Responding to the polling numbers and his personal approval ratings, Luxon was “absolutely” confident he would still be prime minister after the caucus meeting.

“I appreciate I’m not going to be the person that everyone wants to go to a beer with, but they know that I’m actually leading a government that is a great custodian of this economy. And in difficult and tough times, that’s what’s needed now: strong economic management and stable coalition government, and that’s what we’re delivering.”

Asked whether the matter would be raised at the caucus meeting, Luxon said there would be “pretty good” conversations, given the media interest that had been “sparked” over the last few days.

He would not expand on what would be talked about in caucus, but said the party had a good culture, and it had been “rebuilt and unified” over the last two-and-a-half years.

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