Category: Politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

Fuel industry leaders are welcoming the government’s moves to increase fuel capacity, but say while it will help with long-term concerns price spikes are a bigger worry.

With the fuel crisis in its fifth week, the government is moving to shore up storage as an insurance policy in case of supply line failures by announcing plans to access more supply as well as getting more storage tanks into service.

“While fuel importers do continue to indicate confidence in near-future orders and while they are already exploring alternatives to Asia as a source of fuel supply, we believe that some residual risk remains,” Finance Minister Nicola Willis said.

She said Cabinet had agreed to explore additional options to guard against the risk of disrupted fuel supply, and was now “actively seeking proposals for New Zealand refined fuel imports on arrangements that would support additional purchase of stocks through to June”.

The government was assessing a series of unsolicited proposals from businesses to help increase supply, including to trade New Zealand’s access to fuel types the country was unable to use – like crude oil, which would need to be refined – for types it could.

On the fuel storage front, Associate Energy Minister Shane Jones confirmed officials were exploring two proposals, including to get some of the unused storage capacity at Marsden Point operating again after the former refinery was downsized to an import-only terminal.

Waitomo fuel chief executive Simon Parham told RNZ more storage would help in the long-term, but would not bring prices down.

“Through the April, May and even into the June window, stock seems to be on the water, there’s been no cargoes cancelled and no ships turned around, so supply looks like it’s steady but it seems to me they want that little extra insurance.

“Looking at extra storage options in New Zealand is also the right thing to do but we’ve just all got to be realistic that that will come at a cost and someone’s got to pay for it.

“Extra storage here, it won’t help with the cost, it just gives us that little bit more resilience in the long term should these supply shocks happen again.”

Automobile Association fuel spokesperson Terry Collins said more capacity would take time and money to build, and ensuring consistent supply needed to be the priority, with the main risks closely linked to what happens in Iran.

“Channel infrastructure, which was a part of the old refinery, has got additional storage, they’ve offered it to the government, but there’s a lag between getting it ready and the immediacy of what’s happening internationally.

“What we could see, possibly, is in a very short period of time spikes and pressure on fuel [prices] coming in here that we do not have time to address by building or refurbishing storage.

“Really it’s about can we get enough to keep what we’ve got going, now.”

He said the threat of further escalation was making markets nervous.

Hoarding leading to shortages

The government again repeated its warning that “minor hoarding” was leading to shortages at service stations in some regions, including Ōpōtiki, Southland and Nelson.

AA’s Terry Collins said fear of losing out was part of the problem.

“Because of their fear, they think about ‘oh, I’m in an area this could happen’ and by their actions it makes it a self-perpetuating action.”

Waitomo’s Simon Parham said suppliers were doing their best.

“We’re always managing our forecasts, one month, two months, even six months out … that’s what we do day in, day out to make sure products get to service stations,” he said.

“We have seen that increase in demand, admittedly it’s starting to taper off a bit now because that demand has been pulled forward and we’re starting to see a lag – and also prices doing what price does when it gets too high, it causes demand destruction.

“There’s plenty of product there, but it’s not always in the places where you need it.”

He said the most useful regulations for the government to cut would be around heavy-vehicle permits.

“You have to apply on an individual truck and an individual route basis, and what that means is it’s admin-heavy, it takes two to three weeks to get this all approved, and so it really reduces your flexibility in the system.”

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

Fuel industry leaders are welcoming the government’s moves to increase fuel capacity, but say while it will help with long-term concerns price spikes are a bigger worry.

With the fuel crisis in its fifth week, the government is moving to shore up storage as an insurance policy in case of supply line failures by announcing plans to access more supply as well as getting more storage tanks into service.

“While fuel importers do continue to indicate confidence in near-future orders and while they are already exploring alternatives to Asia as a source of fuel supply, we believe that some residual risk remains,” Finance Minister Nicola Willis said.

She said Cabinet had agreed to explore additional options to guard against the risk of disrupted fuel supply, and was now “actively seeking proposals for New Zealand refined fuel imports on arrangements that would support additional purchase of stocks through to June”.

The government was assessing a series of unsolicited proposals from businesses to help increase supply, including to trade New Zealand’s access to fuel types the country was unable to use – like crude oil, which would need to be refined – for types it could.

On the fuel storage front, Associate Energy Minister Shane Jones confirmed officials were exploring two proposals, including to get some of the unused storage capacity at Marsden Point operating again after the former refinery was downsized to an import-only terminal.

Waitomo fuel chief executive Simon Parham told RNZ more storage would help in the long-term, but would not bring prices down.

“Through the April, May and even into the June window, stock seems to be on the water, there’s been no cargoes cancelled and no ships turned around, so supply looks like it’s steady but it seems to me they want that little extra insurance.

“Looking at extra storage options in New Zealand is also the right thing to do but we’ve just all got to be realistic that that will come at a cost and someone’s got to pay for it.

“Extra storage here, it won’t help with the cost, it just gives us that little bit more resilience in the long term should these supply shocks happen again.”

Automobile Association fuel spokesperson Terry Collins said more capacity would take time and money to build, and ensuring consistent supply needed to be the priority, with the main risks closely linked to what happens in Iran.

“Channel infrastructure, which was a part of the old refinery, has got additional storage, they’ve offered it to the government, but there’s a lag between getting it ready and the immediacy of what’s happening internationally.

“What we could see, possibly, is in a very short period of time spikes and pressure on fuel [prices] coming in here that we do not have time to address by building or refurbishing storage.

“Really it’s about can we get enough to keep what we’ve got going, now.”

He said the threat of further escalation was making markets nervous.

Hoarding leading to shortages

The government again repeated its warning that “minor hoarding” was leading to shortages at service stations in some regions, including Ōpōtiki, Southland and Nelson.

AA’s Terry Collins said fear of losing out was part of the problem.

“Because of their fear, they think about ‘oh, I’m in an area this could happen’ and by their actions it makes it a self-perpetuating action.”

Waitomo’s Simon Parham said suppliers were doing their best.

“We’re always managing our forecasts, one month, two months, even six months out … that’s what we do day in, day out to make sure products get to service stations,” he said.

“We have seen that increase in demand, admittedly it’s starting to taper off a bit now because that demand has been pulled forward and we’re starting to see a lag – and also prices doing what price does when it gets too high, it causes demand destruction.

“There’s plenty of product there, but it’s not always in the places where you need it.”

He said the most useful regulations for the government to cut would be around heavy-vehicle permits.

“You have to apply on an individual truck and an individual route basis, and what that means is it’s admin-heavy, it takes two to three weeks to get this all approved, and so it really reduces your flexibility in the system.”

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 should start prioritising diesel allocation now as the fuel situation is only getting worse, Westpac’s chief economist says.

It comes as supply chain data from US investment bank JP Morgan reports the last shipments of fuel from Gulf Oil are likely to arrive in New Zealand on 20 April.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says while there will be “some form of disruption to fuel at some point in time”, for now it’s “business as usual”.

Speaking to Morning Report on the unfolding fuel crisis, Luxon said as long as phases one and two of the national fuel plan are effective, people won’t have to worry about phases three and four.

“At this point in time we’ve had no indication that our fuel importers who we talk to daily, multiple times a day, have had any cancellation of their forward orders,” Luxon said.

“Keep working, keep the kids in school, doing all that stuff. Please don’t think ‘it’s Covid 2.0, I’m making sourdough at home again’.”

Luxon said he had received assurances from Korean President Lee Jae Myung that New Zealand will receive all of the fuel it ordered last year.

“All of the refineries in the different countries which we source our oil from are hustling in the world looking for alternatives. Some are getting some success, some are not.”

The government’s utmost priority was ensuring that the country had fuel – even if that meant fuel suppliers paying additional Iranian tolls, he said.

“We are as well prepared as any country that I’ve talked to, but … we’re thinking about days ahead.”

Luxon said he was leaving it to fuel importers and distributors to organise how to allocate fuel.

“There needs to be a reworking of the allocations which is what the importers and the distributors need to work out this week, and it’s up to them to do so.”

‘This problem is not going away’

Westpac chief economist Kelly Eckhold told Morning Report the government would be wise to start prioritising diesel allocation now, and that the situation is only getting worse.

Yemen’s Houthis have now entered the war, and Iran has accused the US of plotting a ground invasion while in the midst of negotiations – threatening to lengthen the conflict.

“The US authorities are talking about the possibility of the war lasting at least another two to four weeks and ground operations would more or less guarantee that it would take much longer than that.”

He expected 91 to cost an average of $3.70 per litre by the end of the week.

“New Zealand is at the long end, at the end of a very long supply chain, and basically mid-April is looking like when it lines up for when there will be challenges here.”

Even though crude oil prices were fluctuating, prices were continuing to rise because it was not reaching refineries, Eckhold said.

Diesel was in even higher demand, and the government would be wise to prioritise its supplies, he added.

“Diesel that we burn now could be diesel that we need in three or four weeks.

“You can get on the bus, you can drive your EV to work, but in the end, if we want a farmer to be getting our food off the land, then he needs that diesel.”

There were also concerns that the alternative route taken by some oil through the Red Sea could be cut off at any time, he said.

“Perhaps about a third of the losses are currently being made up by utilising those pipelines. Obviously, it probably only takes one of those tankers to get blown up in the Red Sea before that route would be choked off.”

He was calling on the government to start escalating its fuel plan now.

“This problem is not going away.”

Finance Minister Nicola Willis said earlier this month that inflation could reach 3.7 percent, but Eckhold said it would likely be closer to 4 percent.

“If you want to talk about worst cases, then we probably should be adding a couple of percentage points on top of that.”

Fuel alert level likely to rise – expert

Energy transition consultant and chair of the Wise Response Society Nathan Surendran told Nine to Noon it was likely the fuel escalation level would rise, and that three of the criteria had likely already been met.

Rationing sooner rather than later was right call, because the “implications of running out of fuel are extremely unpalatable”, Surendran said.

“This is a massive amount of energy that’s disappeared from the global economy. And it is very, very likely that we will have some form of rationing at some point.”

The government needed especially to reserve fuel for the production and transport of food, he said.

It was counting ships bound for New Zealand as part of its fuel stocks, but he was concerned that those vessels could be redirected if it was outdbid by another country.

“These are commercial entities and their profit making mandate comes before anything else.”

He acknowledged raising the fuel escalation level could induce panic-buying – but pointed out that was happening already.

“Hopefully people have filled up now and they’re at capacity and we’ll just go back to more normal buying cycles.”

‘A price shock crisis’

Rural fuel distributor Fern Energy says with allocation rules as they are, it is needing to prioritise some of its fuel deliveries based on need.

The most up-to-date figures showed that there was 18.1 days of diesel in the country, with a further 28.3 days worth on ships bound for New Zealand, but an update is due to be released Monday.

Fern Energy chief executive Chris Gourley told Morning Report people were trying to beat the price by filling up early, and in some cases by hoarding, which was creating demand spikes in certain regions that could not be met because of new allocation rules.

“Importers have said to us that in some ports, they are managing that fuel to make sure it lasts until that next boat comes in, and they’re giving us strict … seven-day allocations.”

He emphasised it was not a problem of supply, but increased demand.

These allocation rules meant that sometimes there was not enough fuel where it was needed, and distributors were forced to bring it in from other regions, which slowed it down, he said.

They were also prioritising deliveries based on need, which was especially important at this critical part of the farming season, Gourley said.

“They are harvesting, they are working through that final stages as they work towards winter … so we are trying to prioritise based on that need, and trying to get to those customers before it becomes dire and they lose their crops.”

Federated Farmers spokesperson David Birkett previously told RNZ up to 95 percent of farming machinery used the fuel.

The hops season had just finished, so recently they had been prioritising that industry, Gourley said.

It was also the middle of the grape harvest season, and there was a huge amount of food in the ground that needed to come out, he added.

The forestry industry was also struggling, but that was more about cost and less about fuel demand, he said.

“Some of them are actually saying ‘do you know what? We’re going to just pull up and stop working until this settles down’.”

It would be “useful” for the government to start telling certain ports how to allocate their fuel, he said.

“(In) three or four weeks when the supply issue settles, it could be too late for some farmers … There could be some need immediately, if it’s possible, to improve allocations for distributors like Fern, so we can get on and get fuel to farmers quicker.”

He was confident that there would not be any issues around supply to the country, but reiterated that allocation was a concern

“Supply isn’t going to be an issue for New Zealand. Sustained high prices is what we’ve got to focus on next.

“The crisis is a price shock crisis.”

‘Financial pressure’

Meanwhile, companion driver service Driving Miss Daisy had so far chosen to absorb the rising cost of fuel.

This was because a large number of its customers were elderly or disabled – people on generally on fixed incomes, it said.

General manager Andrew Kirkpatrick told Morning Report over the last four to five weeks, their fuel expenditure was up 30 to 35 percent.

It was getting “harder and harder” to afford this additional cost, he said.

“Transferring our pain to our clients is something we want to avoid if we can.”

It would be helpful for the government to provide financial assistance to those people on fixed incomes, who might not be able to afford their service if they had to increase prices, Kirkpatrick said.

“For many of our clients we are an essential service, not a luxury. And for those clients, they don’t necessarily have practical alternatives.

“For them to be able to continue to remain engaged in the community, to get to their medical appointments, to do their shopping or their rehabilitation, whatever it might be. If they are asked to pay that additional costs it will put financial pressure on them.”

The company hoped it would be an essential service as it was during the pandemic, so that if the country is forced to allocate fuel or subsidies are needed, its clients won’t be disadvantaged.

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

New Zealand’s fuel stocks remain strong, says the prime minister, but Cabinet has today discussed the option of pursuing further commercial opportunities to add to current supplies.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is giving an update on the national fuel plan during an post-Cabinet media conference along side Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Associate Energy Minister Shane Jones.

Luxon opened today’s briefing by saying the New Zealand government was still “gravely concerned” by the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

“Every day New Zealanders are waking up to news of developments in the Middle East, but what we are yet to see is a move towards a negotiated settlement and solution.

“The longer it goes on, the more the impact, whether that’s the human toll in the Middle East, and also the economic pain and suffering being caused around the world.”

He said the government’s first priority in the situation was maintaining fuel supply.

“That’s mission critical to protecting our economy. Without supply, there are serious impacts to jobs and incomes.”

Today’s briefing after the weekly cabinet meeting follows the latest data released from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) showing total fuel stocks in the country have increased since the last update on Wednesday.

Luxon said he could assure New Zealanders the country was in a good position, with “healthy stocks” of fuel, and the fuel companies had made changes ot their allocations to support demand over the coming weeks, including through Easter and the upcoming school holidays.

He said this meant New Zealand remained in phase one of its fuel response plan.

“But we are continuing to prepare for a move to phase 2 if we need to.”

He said the Cabinet today discussed the option of pursuing further commercial opportunities to add to the current level of fuel security.

“Obviously any option we pursue has to be affordable, practical and timely, but officials are pursuing options with urgency.”

Willis said the government was now actively seeking proposals for New Zealand-refined fuel imports on arrangements that would support additional purchase of stocks through to June.

“The proposals would involve the government working with industry partners to deliver additional fuel from offshore to manage the risk of a shortage of supply. An insurance policy, if you will.”

She said the government had already been approached by some parties with unsolicited proposals to increase supply, commercial assessment of those proposals was now being urgently carried out.

She said this could see additional supplies for New Zealand stored offshore.

On Friday last week, the government gave more detail on updates to its 2024 fuel plan.

That laid out what would trigger a change from the current phase 1, to higher phases; more specifics about what each phase would mean, and how different sectors would be prioritised for fuel if it came to that.

The government has continued to emphasise New Zealand does not face supply shortages.

However, prices have continued to be high – with data from price monitoring app Gaspy showing a 90-cent increase for Unleaded 91 and a 158-cent increase for diesel in the past 28 days.

Luxon told Morning Report on Monday said as long as phases one and two of the national fuel plan are effective, people won’t have to worry about phases three and four.

“At this point in time we’ve had no indication that our fuel importers who we talk to daily, multiple times a day, have had any cancellation of their forward orders,” Luxon said.

He said the government’s utmost priority was ensuring that the country had fuel – even if that meant fuel suppliers paying additional Iranian tolls.

Luxon said he was leaving it to fuel importers and distributors to organise how to allocate fuel.

“There needs to be a reworking of the allocations which is what the importers and the distributors need to work out this week, and it’s up to them to do so.”

Latest figures from MBIE show total national fuel stocks have increased since the last update with movements remaining within expectations. Stocks continue to be robust across petrol, diesel and jet fuel.

Overall, New Zealand has 59.3 days of petrol, 54.5 days of diesel and 50.4 days of jet fuel available. This is as of 11.59pm 25 March.

This fuel is either in New Zealand, within our Exclusive Economic Zone (New Zealand waters) – which includes ships with fuel unloading, ships at berth yet to unload, and ships moving between ports – or on water outside the EEZ up to 3 weeks away.

There is currently no indication of fuel supply disruption, and fuel continues to flow normally into New Zealand.

Supply chain data from US investment bank JP Morgan earlier reported the last shipments of fuel from Gulf Oil are likely to arrive in New Zealand on 20 April.

Westpac chief economist Kelly Eckhold told Monday’s Morning Report the government would be wise to start prioritising diesel allocation now, and that the situation is only getting worse.

He expected 91 to cost an average of $3.70 per litre by the end of the week.

“New Zealand is at the long end, at the end of a very long supply chain, and basically mid-April is looking like when it lines up for when there will be challenges here.

“Diesel that we burn now could be diesel that we need in three or four weeks.

“You can get on the bus, you can drive your EV to work, but in the end, if we want a farmer to be getting our food off the land, then he needs that diesel.”

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

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is giving an update on the national fuel plan during an post-Cabinet media conference along side Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Associate Energy Minister Shane Jones.

The briefing after the weekly cabinet meeting follows the latest data released from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) showing total fuel stocks in the country have increased since the last update on Wednesday.

On Friday last week, the government gave more detail on updates to its 2024 fuel plan.

That laid out what would trigger a change from the current phase 1, to higher phases; more specifics about what each phase would mean, and how different sectors would be prioritised for fuel if it came to that.

The government has continued to emphasise New Zealand does not face supply shortages.

However, prices have continued to be high – with data from price monitoring app Gaspy showing a 90-cent increase for Unleaded 91 and a 158-cent increase for diesel in the past 28 days.

Luxon told Morning Report on Monday said as long as phases one and two of the national fuel plan are effective, people won’t have to worry about phases three and four.

“At this point in time we’ve had no indication that our fuel importers who we talk to daily, multiple times a day, have had any cancellation of their forward orders,” Luxon said.

He said the government’s utmost priority was ensuring that the country had fuel – even if that meant fuel suppliers paying additional Iranian tolls.

Luxon said he was leaving it to fuel importers and distributors to organise how to allocate fuel.

“There needs to be a reworking of the allocations which is what the importers and the distributors need to work out this week, and it’s up to them to do so.”

Latest figures from MBIE show total national fuel stocks have increased since the last update with movements remaining within expectations. Stocks continue to be robust across petrol, diesel and jet fuel.

Overall, New Zealand has 59.3 days of petrol, 54.5 days of diesel and 50.4 days of jet fuel available. This is as of 11.59pm 25 March.

This fuel is either in New Zealand, within our Exclusive Economic Zone (New Zealand waters) – which includes ships with fuel unloading, ships at berth yet to unload, and ships moving between ports – or on water outside the EEZ up to 3 weeks away.

There is currently no indication of fuel supply disruption, and fuel continues to flow normally into New Zealand.

Supply chain data from US investment bank JP Morgan earlier reported the last shipments of fuel from Gulf Oil are likely to arrive in New Zealand on 20 April.

Westpac chief economist Kelly Eckhold told Monday’s Morning Report the government would be wise to start prioritising diesel allocation now, and that the situation is only getting worse.

He expected 91 to cost an average of $3.70 per litre by the end of the week.

“New Zealand is at the long end, at the end of a very long supply chain, and basically mid-April is looking like when it lines up for when there will be challenges here.

“Diesel that we burn now could be diesel that we need in three or four weeks.

“You can get on the bus, you can drive your EV to work, but in the end, if we want a farmer to be getting our food off the land, then he needs that diesel.”

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

Regulatory feedback is being called for as the government looks to tackle global fuel uncertainty.

The government laid out its response plan to the rising fuel costs triggered by the conflict in the Middle East following the US-Israel attacks on Iran one month ago.

The National Fuel Plan mimics the Covid response in that it has four phases, each outlining measures that would be taken if the situation gets progressively worse.

New Zealand is currently at phase one and the government has said for now there is sufficient supply and no need for stockpiling.

The Ministry for Regulation is now urging businesses, fuel users, freight operators, and the wider public to report any barriers that could stand in the way of the government’s response.

The ministry’s main job is to ensure quality across regulatory systems and encouraging productivity.

Regulation Minister David Seymour said the ministry was interested in hearing from businesses on the front line including fuel companies, freight operators, contractors, primary producers and retailers.

“We can’t control what happens in the Middle East. We can control how we get fuel flowing through New Zealand pumps. If red tape is getting in the way of that goal, we want to hear it.”

Seymour said the government was trying to avoid a “repeat of the Covid-19 lockdowns”.

“We don’t want to miss something which could lead to negative effects down the line.

“That’s why we want to hear from people affected by edicts from Wellington; what regulatory barriers do you see getting in the way of fuel supply?”

Examples of submissions that could be made included barriers affecting fuel transport, storage, distribution, local delivery, freight movements, business operations, or the ability of firms to adapt quickly to changing supply conditions.

“In a disruption every unnecessary delay matters. If there are regulations that make it harder to import, store, distribute, or use fuel efficiently, they need to be identified now. Not when the pressure is at its peak,” Seymour said.

Submissions can be made to the Ministry for Regulation’s Red Tape Tipline.

The price of 91 and diesel fuel in most parts of the country was well past $3 per litre with some stations running dry especially on discount days.

Motor Trade Association spokesperson Simon Bradwell recently said there were concerns over the increasing possibility of people driving off without paying for fuel.

He said businesses were doing what they can to keep prices down as it was also in their best interest.

The government also announced earlier this week almost 150,000 families with children will receive an extra $50 a week to help with the rising cost of fuel.

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 Immigration (Enhanced Risk Management) Amendment Bill has been debated in Parliament for the first time. The government bill, which would amend the Immigration Act, is being shepherded by National MP and Minister of Immigration, Erica Stanford.

The bill describes itself as aimed at better meeting the Immigration Act’s purpose of balancing “the national interest… and the rights of individuals”.

Amendments proposed in the bill would touch on both sides of that equation, with new tools to both deport immigrants and to protect them.

The bill’s main provisions are outlined below, followed by political responses.

The bill: Deportations

The deportation aspect of the bill strengthens the “deportation liability settings” for immigrants on resident visas. It also makes “deportation liability a more likely outcome for lower-level criminal offending”. (All quotes in this section are from the bill’s own Explanatory Note.)

After being granted a resident visa, a migrant remains liable to be deported for subsequent criminal offending. The period of continuing liability varies depending on the severity of the offence. Those liability periods (since receiving a visa) are lengthening.

For offences subject to imprisonment of at least three months, the period of liability lengthens from two to five years. For offences punishable by two-plus years imprisonment, the liability period changes from five years to 10. For offences culpable for five-plus years, the liability period changes from 10years to 15; and for offending punishable by at least 10 years’ prison, it changes from 10 years to 20.

The liability period resets if a migrant with a resident visa is absent from New Zealand for five years.

Criminal conviction outside New Zealand prior to a visa being granted always makes a visa-holder liable for deportation.

Other deportation liability changes aim to fill gaps in current legislation. The bill would clarify “the range of false and misleading submissions that can make a person liable for deportation; and that historic crimes that were committed outside New Zealand can give rise to deportation liability; and how administrative errors can give rise to deportation liability.”

Misleading and false information will also include omission of information that was potentially prejudicial.

More data sharing between government agencies would be allowed, to check things such as applicant’s claims, identity and character; or to check eligibility for funded services or benefits.

Anybody committing a criminal act while in New Zealand on a visitor or temporary visa, as well as those illegally in the country, would be unable to appeal a deportation order on humanitarian grounds.

Victims of serious offenders who are undergoing deportation proceedings would have “the right to be heard during their offender’s deportation proceedings, whether or not the offence against them is the basis of the offender’s liability for deportation.”

The bill: Migrant exploitation offences

The bill also includes changes to offences and penalties related to migrant exploitation. There are three particular changes.

The bill “extends the maximum prison sentence for migrant exploitation offending from seven to ten years”. (All quotes in this section are from the bill’s own Explanatory Note.)

It creates new offences relating to providing “incorrect or incomplete information to the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE)”, and also for failing to provide wage and time records when requested.

It would also extend MBIE’s timeframe for issuing infringement notices for some offences. Migrant exploitation offences have not always been readily or easily reported by victims, which has allowed some offenders to escape justice by dint of the time limits for proceedings allowed for by the Summary Proceedings Act 1957.

The bill will also seek to prevent the use of temporary asylum visas as a stalling tactic in order to apply for a different kind of visa. An asylum claimant who withdraws that claim would be ineligible for other visas.

Political agreement

The three governing parties are in favour, unsurprisingly. Chris Penk spoke for National, on behalf of the Immigration Minister Erica Stanford.

“This bill provides practical, targeted improvements so that our immigration system can detect, deter, and respond to risk in a firm but fair way, welcoming those who contribute while being clear eyed about misuse and criminal behaviour.”

ACT’s Parmjeet Parmar noted that while ACT supports the bill, they want to further extend deportation liability for residence class visa holders. The current 10-year liability is being extended to 20 years for serious crimes. Parmar wants more.

“Why should consequences expire after 10 years or 20 years if somebody is on a residence class visa? I am proposing an amendment that it should be an unlimited period – the extension of deportation liability should be for an unlimited period – and I’m talking about serious criminal offending.”

New Zealand First offered no amendments. Casey Costello argued the bill fits with the view of American conservative political philosopher Russell Kirk that “every right is married to a duty; every freedom owes a corresponding responsibility”.

Political opposition

Labour’s Phil Twyford (a former associate minister of immigration), strongly opposed the bill.

“This bill is a pretty naked exercise in election-year politicking at the expense of migrants and refugees. The minister of immigration wants to look tough.”

Speaking from his experience as a minister and electorate MP he spoke about humanitarian cases that sometimes involved disabled children.

“I can tell the House that there’s no shortage of cases where Immigration New Zealand has made a sequence of poor decisions, where the interests of the children have not been given the weight required under our international treaty obligations. Justice is, in a significant number of cases, only finally delivered through an appeal to the tribunal on exceptional humanitarian circumstances.”

Green MP Ricardo Menendez March was no less incensed, though his focus was on undocumented migrants.

“This is a Trump administration-inspired, MAGA-loving piece of legislation that deserves to be put in the bin. If you heard the minister’s contribution, you would think that this is a completely different bill from the one I have in front of me.

“In the bill itself, it’s quite clear: this is a bill that seeks to demonise and target undocumented migrants by giving more powers to our immigration officials to target them if they suspect that they may be in breach of their visa conditions.”

Duncan Webb raised an issue with the proposed changes to rules about cancelling an asylum claim. He pointed out that if an asylum seeker fell in love with a New Zealand citizen while awaiting a decision on their claim, they would no longer be able to cancel their claim (in order to obtain a partnership visa) because doing so would make them ineligible for any visa.

Te Pāti Māori did not speak in the first reading debate.

• The Immigration (Enhanced Risk Management) Amendment Billis here.
• The bill’s Parliamentary progress page ishere.
• The Regulatory Impact Statement for the billis here.
• The Departmental Disclosure Statement for the billis here.
• The Hansard report of the first reading debate ishere.
• The Education & Workforce Committee page – for information on submissions etc ishere.

RNZ’s The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament’s Office of the Clerk. Enjoy ourarticles orpodcast at RNZ.

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

Labour leader Chris Hipkins has denied misleading New Zealanders after revelations he had been aware of the potential risks to teenagers of a second Covid-19 vaccine dose in 2022 despite recently claiming otherwise.

Earlier this month, Hipkins said the Ministry of Health never passed that expert advice on to ministers. That was also the finding of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19.

However, a newly surfaced Cabinet paper, uncovered by NZ Herald senior writer Derek Cheng, showed that information was provided to ministers. The paper, in Hipkins’ name, was presented to a Cabinet committee meeting in late March.

The advice – from the Covid-19 Vaccine Technical Advisory Group – stated a two dose schedule for the Pfizer vaccine “may add an unnecessary risk of myocarditis” for children under the age of 18.

By that point, 92 percent of 12- to 17-year-olds had already received both doses of the vaccine.

Speaking on Friday, Hipkins said he had forgotten about that particular Cabinet paper, but any suggestions of a cover-up were “just utterly wrong”.

“I didn’t recall the existence of the Cabinet paper in question,” he said. “Had I done so, I might have added an extra word or two to what I said earlier.”

Hipkins said the paper did not “materially change” the fact that the advice was not given to ministers earlier at the point they were actually making decisions around mandates.

“The government never received the advice when those decisions were being made.”

Asked why he did not make the information public when he did become aware in late March, Hipkins said he always left that guidance to the “relevant health officials” at the regular media conferences.

“I’m not a health practitioner,” he said. “I think it was appropriate that we left that to the relevant health officials.”

Hipkins said there was “absolutely not” an active decision to keep the information from the public, noting that the Cabinet paper was slated for proactive release.

He said, as a parent himself, he understood people’s anxiety about their children’s health: “I totally do.”

After the release of the commission’s findings in early March, Dr Andrew Old, deputy director-general of health at the Ministry of Health’s public health agency, acknowledged a “significant failing” regarding the advice about 12- to -17-year-olds.

He accepted there had been a delay in providing that information to ministers and a failure to clearly communicate it to the public “in a timely way”.

“We recognise the importance of timely, evidence-based communication for maintaining public trust and confidence. In this instance, the standard was not met.”

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 move to strip family background information from alcohol and drug reports used in court has angered some defence lawyers and counsellors.

The Ministry of Justice said the change had been introduced to improve the consistency, quality and cost-effectiveness of the reports, and to improve justice services.

But it has come as a surprise to critics who were calling it a shock backwards step, and an “injustice” to judges and New Zealanders.

An alcohol and drug counsellor and a defence lawyer were concerned it undermined the Sentencing Act, made it harder to get people into the right rehabilitation, and increased the likelihood of reoffending, creating more victims and more cost down the line.

Alcohol and drug reports were used to help inform judges about whether an offender had addiction issues and whether they needed help.

The reports could also indicate the source of those problems and help inform sentencing and rehabilitation decisions.

When writing them, counsellors interviewed offenders about their history of alcohol and other drugs usage and their willingness to engage with rehabilitation services.

A study from 2016 showed in New Zealand more than 50 percent of crime was committed by people under the influence of drugs and alcohol. Ninety-one percent of prisoners had a lifetime diagnosis of a mental health or substance use disorder and 62 percent had this diagnosis in the past 12-months.

Why are the reports important?

Alcohol and drug counsellor, Roger Brooking, had been writing those reports for 20 years. He told RNZ nine times out of 10, when someone ended up with an alcohol and drug problem, it was because of things that happened to them when they were children.

He said a significant percentage of clients in the justice sector were born into a family where – for example – the parents were alcoholics or drug addicts, or the parents had mental health problems.

“I would include all that information in the report, explaining to the court or to the judge, these are the person’s background circumstances which led to their use of cannabis at the age of nine, alcohol at the age of 12, and methamphetamine at the age of 15, and that’s why they now appear in court.”

Co-chair for Te Matakahi, the Defence Lawyers Association New Zealand Elizabeth Hall told RNZ the reports were “incredibly useful” because they explained and unpicked why someone might have alcohol and drug issues.

“This idea that it’s just a choice that people make is so wrong,” she said, “alcohol and drug addiction issues are often a symptom of mental health struggles, they’re often a symptom of trauma.”

She said she had seen the “huge value and the economy of having these reports prepared”.

“Once the report’s prepared, it doesn’t just inform only the sentence in court. It also then gets handed on to community probation or to the Corrections Department. It gets filtered through that person’s entire dealing with a sentence, with the work on rehabilitation, and it’s a resource available in the future.”

As well, Section 8 of the Sentencing Act 2002 states the Court must take into account the offender’s personal, family, whanau, community, and cultural background in imposing a sentence or other means of dealing with the offender with a partly or wholly rehabilitative purpose.

The change

Earlier this month, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) announced it had set up a new Approved Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) Report Writers Service.

In a statement to RNZ, Lance Harrison, group manager (acting), commissioning and service improvement from MOJ explained it was doing so to improve the consistency, quality and cost-effectiveness of these reports, and to improve justice services.

The ministry was also aware of differences in report costs between courts and legal aid funded reports, and said it was “responsible for ensuring public funds are used efficiently and effectively”.

And the ministry acknowledged MOJ had received feedback from judges some reports were not up to standard, and had received feedback some report writers were not qualified for the work.

As part of the updated service, MOJ included guidance for a template that stated “the report should not include information on personal, family, whānau, community and cultural background relying on section 27 Sentencing Act 2002″.

Harrison said the new report template and guidelines were developed to ensure consistent quality and provide judges with key information.

He said the template focused specifically on alcohol and drug-related information about the participant and judges would continue to receive information from multiple sources to inform sentencing decisions. The Sentencing Act would not be underminded, Harrison added.

“Within their scope of practice, the approved report writer may include brief information about the offender’s mental health history as relevant.

“Approved report writers will continue to be able to exercise their professional discretion about the information they choose to include in the report, as they hold the relevant expertise,” Harrison stated.

Harrison also told RNZ there were other avenues to raise information about a participants’ personal, family, whānau, community or cultural background information relying on section 27 of the Sentencing Act 2002, for example “oral submissions or privately-funded reports”.

“The Ministry’s view is that AOD reports should not be used as a vehicle for presenting general information provided for under section 27 of the Sentencing Act 2002.”

Ultimately, MOJ said the change to the reports was part of ongoing efforts to improve justice services.

The criticism

But Brooking was “stunned” when he was alerted to the change, and “devastated” by it.

“It’s not something that judges would agree with, it’s not something that addiction specialists would agree with, because if you’re only putting in information about alcohol and drug use into these reports, they’re not going to be of much use at the end of the day.”

And he was not reassured writers would be able to “exercise discretion” because that information would not necessarily be available to those applying to be part of the service. He was also concerned about the reliance on Section 27 cultural reports to raise information about a defendants background.

He pointed out the government had scrapped funding for those reports. Now, Brooking said, a very small number of defendants a year might be able to fund a cultural report privately.

“They would have to have wealthy parents or have stashed away funds from drug dealing that the cops didn’t find.”

He said it was misguided to think Section 27 was still a “viable mechanism” to provide background information.

Brooking said he already struggled trying to get defendants into rehabilitation programmes because the waiting lists were so long, “now my job has been made even harder”.

Hall called it an “incredibly frustrating retrograde step”, and that it was also “grossly insulting to the expert practitioners” who wrote the reports.

“It’s like asking a doctor to give a diagnosis, but without explaining what the symptoms are, how the disease has come about in the first place, what’s been tried, what probably will work, what probably won’t work.”

She said it was shortsighted and would result in “shoving the problem further down the road”.

“The Ministry of Justice takes a very short term approach on what it considers to be financially efficient,” she said.

Hall said cost saving on a report that undermined the ability to provide rehabilitation to someone before the court would make it more likely that person re-offended, causing more victims and more cost.

She said there would “absolutely” be an economic outcome in terms of replication of work down the line.

“It’s an injustice to the judges who are being charged with the responsibility of sentencing New Zealand citizens, and it’s an injustice to the community at large, because if sentences aren’t effective in reducing a person’s risk of reoffending, then that plays out in community with further victims going forward.”

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 is crying foul after the government admitted more than half of families in material hardship will not benefit from its fuel support package.

In question time on Wednesday, Social Development Minister Louise Upston confirmed only 48 percent of those families will get the $50 boost to in-work tax credits.

“According to the latest figures from Statistics New Zealand for 2024-25, 48 percent of children in material hardship are in working households. This support we are providing is intended to be timely, temporary, and targeted at those most in need,” she said.

Ministers – including the Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Finance Minister Nicola Willis – have repeated emphasised the need for relief to be “targeted and temporary” to avoid adding to debt.

Upston did the same.

“Our government is very clear about the fact that what is happening in the Middle East is having an impact on many New Zealanders, with the fuel-price pressure that they are facing,” she said.

“We are also very clear that any response needs to be targeted, timely, and temporary, otherwise every single person in New Zealand would be affected by inflation going up again.”

However, the Greens’ spokesperson Ricardo Menendez March said the figure undercut the government’s claim of focusing on those who most needed support.

“That is 52 percent of parents with children material hardship won’t be covered by the in-work, tax credit boost … this may be children of beneficiaries. That may include people who were recently made unemployed. It may include parents with lifelong health conditions. It may include people who have been struggling with homelessness.

“People on income support including disabled people, still need to access fuel to get to the doctor, to get to job appointments, to pick up their kids from school, and will be the most impacted by the fuel crisis.

“It’s inexcusable and callous for the government to completely exclude them from receiving support.”

Upston on Wednesday acknowledged to RNZ that support was available to beneficiaries and others who might need help – and requests for such help was likely to increase.

“There is already assistance available for costs for those on a benefit to get to an interview if they need it – but if you look at this fuel price pressure it will have an impact on a range of households, so yes, I expect that there will be more seeking assistance.”

Upston and Willis have also pointed to the planned increase to benefit rates coming on 1 April.

However, March said that was disingenous.

“Advances for fuel comes as debt, so she’s basically asking our poorest to enter into debt,” he said.

“The other assistance that exists in the form of the Transition to Work grant is quite limited, and most people don’t get to access it, and it only covers things like job appointments, not necessarily picking up kids from school or doctor’s appointments.

“The increase that people will see to their benefits on the 1 April is something that is legally required … the indexation has nothing to do with the fuel crisis and it’s disingenuous to pretend that this is actually meeting the scale of the challenge that people in poverty will face.”

Speaking to reporters before heading into Question Time on Thursday, Willis pointed to the increase to benefits coming on 1 April.

“Their families will already be receiving an increase in income. The in-work tax credit is different from many other benefits that are paid in that it’s not adjusted for inflation and these are working parents who also face a wider range of obligations.

“So we think it’s appropriate that those working parents are who we target with this relief.”

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