Category: Politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Prime Minister is set to face questions as he lays out his government’s plans for the last weeks of the political year.

Christopher Luxon is speaking to media after a regular meeting of Cabinet ministers. You can watch the press conference live at the top of this page from bout 4pm.

Parliament will sit for the last time this year on December 18.

It comes as former Labour Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer criticises the government for passing too many laws under urgency.

Meanwhile, Luxon has been defending Police Minister Mark Mitchell, who has been facing questions about what he knew about the investigation into former top cop Jevon McSkimming, after claims by former Commissioner Andrew Coster.

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 former Labour Prime Minister says Parliament is passing too many laws without proper scrutiny.

Sir Geoffrey Palmer told Nine to Noon the government was increasingly pushing through legislation under urgency, which allowed it to skip stages such as public consultation and select committees.

But Leader of the House Chris Bishop said just nine Bills have been passed in that way, and there were good reasons for all of them.

Palmer said the normal checks and balances were stripped out when laws were made at pace.

“Urgency has become the default mechanism for dealing with Parliamentary legislation and the standing orders are not followed and you also have extended sittings – and both of those mean the Government’s agenda is completely at the will of the Government,” he said.

Palmer said the Fast-Track Approvals Act 2024 – and its amendment – was a classic example of a trend that “ministers know best” and was “ministerial dictatorship”.

“It was criticised by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment then, Simon Upton, the amendment bill puts the process that was enacted in 2024 on steroids.

“It gets faster and faster. It will be a fast-track to environmental degradation, [more] than it already is.”

Bishop was approached for further comment.

The legislation, which passed under urgency at the end of last year, is back before Parliament with an amendment that the government intended to push through by the end of 2025.

It said the amendment to the Act would increase competition in the supermarket sector.

Despite being open for just over 10 days, it received 2158 submissions, with about 95 percent opposed.

Palmer said legislative checks and balances – which he already considered lacking – were further reduced when legislation was made at pace.

“What is the hurry? Legislation is law-making. You want to get it right. You have to analyse it, you have to do proper research, you don’t bang it through because a minister has an idea.

“It needs to be properly drafted by Parliamentary council. We have had a degradation of our legislative system in New Zealand in recent years.”

Bishop said the government had a big legislative agenda and limited hours in ordinary house time to get it done.

Regarding the use of urgency, he said: “I am reluctant to use urgency to avoid select committees outside of the standard Budget urgency process, and it is only done so when there are good reasons.”

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

Parliament’s final weeks of the year began with Scrutiny Week, and while bellicose exchanges dominated headlines, much examination took place in relatively calmer hearings.

Coverage of Parliament’s biannual scrutiny weeks is often dominated by the more theatrical moments of verbal sparring between ministers and opposition MPs.

But in the hearings where ministers are absent, leaving only ministry officials and committee MPs present, the lack of a minister-vs-opposition dynamic allows for a more inquisitive and constructive dialogue.

One such example last week was the annual review hearing of the Ministry of Justice, which carried a noticeably calmer, more focused tone.

There is considerable crossover between membership of the Justice Committee and the MPs who you might call ‘practitioners of the committee of the whole House stage’; those their parties often rely on to dissect the finer details of legislation. Among them is Green MP Lawrence Xu-Nan, who this week dissected annual report numbers with justice officials and went deep into the data on Māori representation in the justice system. The exchange between Xu-Nan and officials was hardly dramatic, but it demonstrated the scrutiny process unfolding in real time.

With less temptation for political tit-for-tat MPs have more room for MPs to really probe the data. Labour MP Duncan Webb used his time to probe the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime and the financial numbers coming from its work. It was a lengthy exchange that, appropriately for a former senior law practitioner, felt like a gentle but revealing courtroom cross-examination.

“Is there any concern around the costs that have been incurred by members of that group?” Webb asked Secretary for Justice Andrew Kibblewhite.

“The group is doing its work. They’re busy and they’re producing quite a lot of advice for ministers. As part of that they’re running quite a lot of engagements,” Kibblewhite replied.

Webb: “What’s the audit check when people put claims in for days worked that the days were worked?”

Kibblewhite: “We would take a member’s claim for days worked on face value.”

Webb: “It’s just, I mean, in terms of the chair, he claimed for 154 days between February and July 25, meaning he worked five days a week in one or two days every weekend and took none of the six public holidays in that period. Does that raise any concern?”

Kibblewhite: “Look, I think this is a pretty passionate undertaking for the chair, and it wouldn’t surprise me if he did work very long days and hours on it.”

This tangent of inquiry continued for some time, with Webb interrogating the costs incurred by both the chair and the advisory group, ranging from salaries to events, including a $3,000 lunch that Justice officials could offer little detail about.

The full exchange took a number of minutes and while fascinating and instructive was not brimming with classic newsy soundbytes. It is likely that scrutiny done well seldom is.

Of course governing-party MPs have the opportunity to ask questions too. Much like in Question Time, some are patsy questions, but in a room without ministers they can take on a different tone. Less jumping in the ring with your colleague, and more rhetorical prompts (but always answered). Questions are aimed at countering Opposition narratives or drawing out positives that officials have not raised.

Following Webb’s probing, National MP Carl Bates offered a gentle counterweight by drawing attention to positive feedback he had received from one of his constituents in Whanganui.

“I got an email the other day from one retailer on the Quay,” Bates said. “I’m interested if the sentiment she shared with me is similar to the sentiment you’re hearing from these meetings across the country. She said, ‘I was genuinely and pleasantly surprised by the amount of work happening behind the scenes to support victims of retail crime, as well as the stronger measures being put in place to hold offenders accountable. It’s encouraging to see that meaningful changes are underway and that positive progress is being made.’

In his reply, Kibblewhite said that they had no detailed surveys, so was cautious not to agree or disagree, but said that the group had been productive and had produced much advice for the Minister.

While the quotable moments extracted for news coverage from Scrutiny Week are often the hostile ones; these more audibly tedious, prescriptive hearings likely tell us far more about how our public entities performed over the past year.

To listen to The House’s coverage from scrutiny week, click the link near the top of the page.

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

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

Police Minister Mark Mitchell says the former Police Commissioner’s claims he knew about allegations being made about Jevon McSkimming “absolute total nonsense”.

Mitchell said he was first informed of concerns regarding former Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming on November 6, 2024.

Last month Mitchell said 36 emails containing allegations about McSkimming were sent to his office but he never saw them.

A protocol in place meant police staff in Mitchell’s office forwarded those emails directly to Police Commissioner Andrew Coster’s office.

In an interview with TVNZ’s Q+A on Sunday, Coster said there were ministers who knew more than they admitted, including the then Minister of Police Chris Hipkins and Mitchell.

He disputed Mitchell was not aware of the allegations before November last year, and claimed it had been discussed “informally” between the two throughout 2024.

Mitchell told Morning Report, he did not know anything about the allegations before November 6, 2024, and he would’ve taken action sooner if he did.

“Had Mr Coster brought forward to me the fact that Jevon McSkimming had entered into an affair that involved a big age gap, a big power imbalance, that involved creating a job for this person in the police and then her butting up against the power of the state I would have done what I did on the sixth of November.

“[It’s] absolute complete nonsense.”

Mitchell said as McSkimming was the Deputy Commissioner at the time it would not be something he would have a “causal conversation” with Coster about.

“It’s a very serious matter. I take really seriously my job about protecting people…”

More to come…

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

Te Pāti Māori’s leadership is adamant the annual general meeting was a “magnificent day for” the movement, despite issues around the decision to expel an MP and the party presidency remaining unresolved.

The meeting showed the party was “anything but a party in disarray” says Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere as he batted away suggestions he should stand down, with one person in attendance calling for everyone to “eat a humble kumara.”

During the pōwhiri, the party leadership was asked by Ngira Simmonds whether they were the right people to unify the party.

Another member asked Tamihere during the AGM whether he would be willing to step down if it was for the good of the party.

In attendance were Māori leaders such as Dame Naida Glavish and Taame Iti. Expelled MP Tākuta Ferris was not at the meeting.

Speaking to reporters after the AGM, which ran much later than expected after general business was opened up after all, Tamihere said he’d stand down if there was a “good reason” to stand down.

“If it’s a reason that a few people don’t like me, that doesn’t cut the mustard.

“You got to have reasons about policy, about program, about politics, not personality. Just because you don’t like somebody doesn’t mean to say you should guillotine them.”

The last minute reinstatement of Mariameno Kapa-Kingi as a member to the party, following her expulsion alongside former member Tākuta Ferris, meant remits and resolutions in relation to the court ruling were unable to be discussed at the AGM.

That included the decisions to expel two MPs, as well as the party presidency. Those issues will be addressed in substantive hearings in February, on the eve of Waitangi Day celebrations.

In terms of welcoming Kapa-Kingi back to the party, Tamihere said it was an issue of trust, which had been “so badly broken” that it was a difficult issue in his mind.

“It might not be in others.”

Newest Te Pāti Māori MP Oriini Kaipara greeted Kapa-Kingi warmly on the day and both stood to sing in support of Simmonds after he spoke.

But Tamihere maintained the party didn’t want to welcome Kapa-Kingi back into the fold.

Co-leader Rawiri Waititi wouldn’t be drawn on whether it was nice to see Kapa-Kingi on the day, “it was nice to see everybody”.

He said the AGM was about the “people,” and the people “turned out today”, and we’re “really pleased” with the outcome.

Ngarewa-Packer added they thrive in face-to-face spaces.

“We had up to nine hours with our people. Some of the busiest people in their marae turned up to make sure their movement heard them,” Ngarewa-Packer said.

Tamihere said the party didn’t file the proceedings, but as someone who was experienced around litigation, “we just go with the system.”

Instead, the AGM reset the “confidence” of the majority of the electorates he said.

“Because they’re the ones that turned up in big numbers, and they felt that they were being adversely impacted by not the leadership, but by the conduct of others.”

In response to Simmonds’ criticism, co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said Simmonds had come up to her and Waititi after the meeting and told them he had 100 percent confidence in their leadership.

“That’s a strong position, and I think that’s the significance of today, is actually being able to eyeball each other and ask the hard questions.”

A resolution was passed during the meeting in support of the co-leaders.

Kapa-Kingi told RNZ it had been a great day to “show face” as the Te Pāti Māori MP for Te Tai Tokerau “who never left”.

She said her electorate reaffirmed the resolutions settled upon by people in Te Tai Tokerau at their Kohewhata hui “some weeks ago.”

But there was a sense of frustation by some as they made their way out of the hui that it had been a waste of time, given key issues couldn’t be discussed.

Hemi Piripi from Te Tai Tokerau told RNZ he believed there was still a lot of division.

“There’s a lot of ‘he said, she said thing’.

“Everyone just needs to eat a humble kumara.”

He said there was a generation who were watching the “waka go down” and he wanted to float the waka and relash it so Māori could come together.

He wanted the president to step down, for the executive to be looked at and for a rotation in leadership roles to be considered.

“He does need to go for the waka to start rising again.”

The AGM was closed to media, but over a number of hours there was intense discussion, with cheers and boos heard at various times and many members leaving as the day went on.

Te Tai Tonga also raised the expulsion of Tākuta Ferris. The electorate had invited the leadership to meet this coming weekend, but Tamihere said he was unavailable due to the family memorial for his son who had passed.

During the AGM, Tamihere gave a speech which Waatea news obtained a copy of.

In it he said “no MP is above the Party. No MP is below the Party.”

“Without discipline – we descend into anarchy. With discipline – we ascend into power,” he said.

Tamihere said he wasn’t concerned at how this would impact the party at the next election, and dismissed suggestions not reinstating the expelled MPs would risk losing support for the party.

There was “time on our side” to repair something based on feelings and personality as opposed to good process, policy and programming.

“It’ll be definitely sorted out before the election.”

Furthermore, Ngarewa-Packer spoke of those who turned up to “make sure their movement heard them, their movement saw them.”

“Their movement felt their absolute unity in going forward and taking this government out.”

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

Former Police Commissioner Andrew Coster says he briefed both former Police Minister Chris Hipkins and current Police Minister Mark Mitchell about allegations being made about Jevon McSkimming from a woman he had an affair with.

Mitchell said he stands by all his statements and that Coster’s “recollections are wrong”.

“If Mr Coster’s focus is on relitigating matters, there are legal recourses available to him and if he truly believes what he is saying, nothing prevents him pursuing those.”

Hipkins has been approached for comment. He told TVNZ’s Q+A he had no recollection of the conversation.

RNZ revealed on Wednesday Coster had resigned as chief executive of the Social Investment Agency after the Independent Police Conduct Authority’s damning report into police’s response to allegations of sexual offending by former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming.

Coster has not responded to several interview requests from RNZ. In a statement on Wednesday he said his resignation was “a result of my acceptance of full responsibility for the shortcomings” identified in the IPCA’s report.

In an told interview with TVNZ’s Q+A on Sunday, Coster said there were ministers who knew more than they admitted.

He said he briefed the then Minister of Police Chris Hipkins in 2022 as he felt it was important he knew what he knew.

He said he told Hipkins that McSkimming told him he had an affair with a “much younger woman” and that the relationship “soured badly” and she was now emailing “all sorts of people with allegations about him”.

He said the briefing was in 2022 in the back of a car while the two men were travelling in the South Island.

He said he was unable to prove the conversation occurred.

“It’s simply my account.”

He said a big reflection for him was to take better notes, adding he wrongly assumed people would not “run for the hills”.

He also disputed that Mitchell was not aware of the allegations before November last year.

“There is no way I was only just telling him about this in my last couple of weeks in the job,” he said.

“We had discussed this informally through 2024…”

He did not have the exact date, but said it was an “informal conversation” in the same terms as his conversation with Hipkins.

Asked why Hipkins and Mitchell would deny that, he said: “you would have to ask them”.

“All I can say is no-one wants to be close to this.”

Coster said he was not saying others acted inappropriately, but that they knew more than they have admitted.

“There doesn’t appear to have been a full disclosure of the conversations,” he said.

Asked why he should be trusted, Coster replied: “I acted honestly, I acted in good faith, my judgements were wrong and I accept that.”

In response to Coster’s allegations, Mitchell said it was “disappointing that following his resignation, that came with an apology to police less than a week ago, Mr Coster is trying to deflect and relitigate matters”.

“I firmly stand by all my statements and facts presented in relation to the IPCA report. Mr Coster’s recollections are wrong.

“I want to make very clear that Mr Coster never briefed me, either formally or informally, about Jevon McSkimming and Ms Z prior to 6 November 2024. I would note his recollections of disclosures in the IPCA report were often found to be inconsistent and unreliable.

“If Mr Coster’s focus is on relitigating matters, there are legal recourses available to him and if he truly believes what he is saying, nothing prevents him pursuing those.”

Mitchell said that as a Government, the focus was on “implementing the recommendations of the IPCA report to ensure this cannot happen again”.

‘My intention was for this to be done properly’

Coster also said he did not pressure staff to get an investigation done in a week so as to not impact McSkimming’s chances of being commissioner.

He said he did not believe it was a complicated investigation to resolve.

“I was really saying let’s make sure we balance the need for him to make an application if he chooses to do that…”

He said at that time McSkimming was a victim of criminal harassment.

The IPCA report said all attendees of meetings regarding the investigation reported feeling pressure.

“I accept that I was very keen to make sure the investigation was moved forward in a timely manner. I wasn’t asking for a shortcut… I had an understanding that in the end it was a pretty simple question of where does the truth lie in this, is there sufficient evidence in the allegations.

“My intention was for this to be done properly.”

He said the “worst case scenario” was if the allegations were false “the ultimate victimisation of Jevon for criminal harassment was missing out” on applying for Commissioner.

‘A trusted colleague’

Coster said the McSkimming he knew during his time in police was a talented police officer and a “trusted colleague” who got on well with people, was innovative and good at his job.

He said he was “gutted” when he read in the media that objectionable material had allegedly been found on his devices.

Asked if he was friends with McSkimming, he said the two “weren’t mates”.

Near the end of the interview, Coster was asked about the comments from Police Commissioner Richard Chambers about the IPCA report and the leadership at the time.

Coster said it was “tempting” when you take over someone’s job “to say everything that went before was broken and wrong, because it creates a great platform to come in and fix it”.

“The truth is, in leadership you stand on the shoulders of others. You build on what others have done before you. And that was my approach, you know, I was quick to acknowledge the good work that was done by the previous Commissioner, to keep what was good and to build on it. That’s the way I would prefer to lead.”

RNZ earlier reported former Deputy Police Commissioner Tania Kura visited McSkimming while he faced charges of possessing child sexual exploitation and bestiality material. McSkimming pleaded guilty earlier this month.

RNZ understands she visited him with Police Assistant Commissioner Sam Hoyle. It’s understood Kura asked Hoyle to visit McSkimming with her. It’s understood the purpose of the visit was to do a welfare check on McSkimming.

Coster told TVNZ’S Q+A that Kura was a “good person”.

“When Tania says I went there to check on his well being, that’s what she was doing. And you know, it’s very tempting to treat someone who has been found to be doing what he was doing as a non-human.

“He was still the responsibility of New Zealand police in terms of his wellbeing, until he wasn’t, and I accept the way it looks and and a risk averse leader would say, you know, stuff him I’m not I’m not going to see him. You know, he can do what he wants. You know, I think she was trying to do the right thing for someone who, at the end of this is still a human being.”

Coster said the impact of the IPCA report and the fallout had been “hugely damaging”.

“It has caused me to step away from work that I believe in deeply, and I think is really important for our country. So, yeah, it’s a massive impact.

“I come at this, though, from a perspective that’s broader than me and my reputation. I know what I did. I know why I did it. I’m able to sleep well at night. You know, my faith is tremendously important to me and is an anchor where I my identity doesn’t come from what people think of me from my work, what I do, it comes from where I see myself standing in relation to the faith that I have.”

IPCA’s damning findings

The IPCA said that when McSkimming disclosed his affair to Coster in 2020, the former Police Commissioner should “at a minimum have asked more questions”.

“This is particularly the case given Deputy Commissioner McSkimming had told him that the female was aggrieved and was sending harassing and threatening emails to him and his community.”

Then in 2023, while a member of the interview panel for the statutory Deputy Commissioner appointment process, Coster “failed to disclose” to the Public Service Commission his knowledge of McSkimming’s relationship which had subsequently led to the emails.

“This failure clearly fell below what a reasonable person would have expected of a person in his position. Notwithstanding his recollection that the matter was already known to the panel, the panel members we spoke to were firm in their recollection that Commissioner Coster did not raise it, and that at that time they did not otherwise know about it. We have seen documentary evidence from the PSC that supports that view.”

In January 2024, Coster due to the number and nature of emails and concern for McSkimming’s welfare, Coster directed Deputy Commissioner Tania Kura to seek the input of the Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC), as well as consider mental health support for the woman.

An investigation into the woman, referred to as Ms Z, began February 2024 and she was charged under the Harmful Digital Communications Act in May 2024.

The charge against the woman was withdrawn in the Wellington District Court in September because McSkimming did not wish to give evidence.

The IPCA accepted that Coster entrusted Kura to commission the FTAC’s involvement, and to adequately respond to any recommendations they made.

“However, he was the Deputy Commissioner’s direct supervisor in terms of overall operations. Ultimately, he bore the responsibility for managing organisational risks.

“Given the very significant risk this matter posed to the organisation, even if the allegations were false, he should have given it higher priority and assured himself that the FTAC report was being handled appropriately. We cannot escape the conclusion that his preconception of Deputy Commissioner McSkimming as the only potential victim clouded his decision-making.”

Coster’s disclosure to the Public Service Commission on 8 October 2024, during the interim Commissioner appointment process also “fell well short of what a reasonable person would expect, given what he knew at the time.”

“At about the same time, he also inappropriately tried to influence the National Integrity Unit’s investigation into Ms Z’s complaint and to persuade the IPCA that the matter could be resolved quickly.

“While Commissioner Coster focused on the need to afford natural justice to Deputy Commissioner McSkimming, he did not sufficiently consider the injustice that would arise if there was indeed truth to Ms Z’s allegations.”

The IPCA said the influence was “most stark” in his letter to the IPCA on 22 October 2024 and in his meetings with staff on 30 October and 4 November 2024, during which he “sought to bring a serious criminal investigation to an unduly rapid conclusion so that it did not impact on a job application process”.

‘I acted in good faith’

In a statement to RNZ on Wednesday, Coster said his resignation was “a result of my acceptance of full responsibility for the shortcomings” identified in the Independent Police Conduct Authority’s report.

“I regret the impact on the young woman at the centre of this matter and sincerely apologise to her for the distress caused.

“I accept that I was too ready to trust and accept at face value Deputy Commissioner McSkimming’s disclosure and explanations to me. I should have been faster and more thorough in looking into the matter.”

Coster acknowledged he should have more fully investigated the allegations when they were brought to his attention, “rather than assuming that their previous disclosure to senior Police staff a few years earlier would have resulted in an investigation if necessary”.

“It is clear that Police’s handling of the whole matter was lacking and that I was ultimately responsible for those matters. It was sobering to read of a number of missed opportunities which should have proceeded differently and more appropriately.”

Coster welcomed Sir Brian’s acknowledgement that the report made no finding of corruption or cover-up, nor did the IPCA find any evidence of any actions involving officers consciously doing the wrong thing or setting out to undermine the integrity of the organisation.

“I made decisions honestly. I acted in good faith. I sought to take all important factors into account with the information I had at the time. While it is not possible to alter past events, I am prepared to take responsibility – I got this wrong.

“I want to apologise to all members of the NZ Police. They work hard every day to keep our communities safe. I know they have been adversely affected by these events.”

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 criticising the $8 million cost to set up the government’s traffic-light system for beneficiaries, which introduced new non-financial sanctions, calling it “smoke and mirrors”.

The Greens have drawn attention to the number, after Ministry of Social Development (MSD) bosses revealed, during Scrutiny Week, that just 12 people had received non-financial sanctions in the six months they’ve been available.

Nearly 13,000 sanctions were issued in total in the September quarter this year.

Green social development spokesperson Ricardo Menendez March said Minister Louise Upston had been “wasting everyone’s time” and money to create more layers of bureaucracy and “effectively unworkable” new sanctions.

Non-financial sanction options are mandatory community work or money management payment cards.

“These were supposed to be a less punitive way of addressing people’s engagement with Work and Income,” Menendez March said. “Clearly, the minister has instead chosen to continue a punitive approach.”

He said the new system merely added another interface for people to interact with, rather than meaningfully assisting people into employment.

“The only thing the traffic light has told us is that most beneficiaries are complying with their obligations… it doesn’t actually solve any problems.”

In response, Upston told RNZ the traffic-light system was “working well”, as it helped people understand their obligations.

In a statement, MSD spokesperson Graham Allpress said the new regime was intended to help beneficiaries avoid sanctions by meeting their obligations, of which and more than 98 percent currently were.

“We invested $8.11 million into a variety of changes, which make it quicker, simpler and easier for our clients to check whether they’re doing what they agreed to do.

“It’s working as intended. People are engaging with us more often.”

Allpress said the small number of non-financial sanctions was because they could be applied only in specific circumstances.

For example, to be eligible, the individual would need to be in case management or have dependent children, fail an obligation just once, and then meet with a case manager within five days of that failure.

Appearing at a select committee on Wednesday, during parliament’s scrutiny week, MSD chief executive Debbie Power denied those circumstances were too narrow, given just 12 people had received non-financial sanctions, saying, “We’re just starting”.

Power said she had heard from the front-line that staff and clients appreciated the transparency of the system’s colour arrangements to better understand what was expected of them.

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

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The reinstatement of an expelled MP raises serious questions for Te Pāti Māori voters ahead of next year’s election, political experts say.

An interim high court ruling has returned Mariameno Kapa-Kingi as a member of the party, after she was ousted alongside Tākuta Ferris in early November, following a period of internal conflict.

She will now attend this weekend’s Annual General Meeting.

Associate professor in politics at Victoria University, Lara Greaves, said voters might be unwilling to back a party in such an unstable state.

“A lot of their voters and a lot of Māori voters would, I think, be fairly tolerant of there being like internal conflict or there being instability, but this has just been like the most unstable we’ve seen a political party really ever be,” she said.

“This one’s been spectacular, this blow-up.”

Te Pāti Māori has acknowledged the judge’s decision and said it looked forward to bringing the issue to its members at this weekend’s meeting.

Greaves said says the blow-up was almost certain to be a topic of conversation among attendees.

“The thing for Kapa-Kingi is that that shows a lot of courage to show up to a party that’s tried to boot you out like that, so I think most people could probably empathise with someone in that sort of work situation, having to show up, but yeah it definitely does seem like Kapa-Kingi and Ferris are, they’re sticking to trying to change the party internally.”

In his ruling, Justice Paul Radich said there was an argument that Kapa-Kingi’s expulsion was based on “mistaken facts” and “procedural irregulaties”. The matter would be revisited at a full hearing in February.

Former Māori Party MP Te Ururoa Flavell said the decision was significant.

“There’s enough there, even in his statements, to suggest that the processes that were used were questionable and, therefore, it’s a bit of an indictment on, of the process that’s been used thus far.”

Flavell said the party had its work cut out for it to restore confidence among voters.

“A lot of damage has been done in what’s happened over these last couple of months, between individuals, for the party as a whole. I think our people and indeed those who are supporters of the Māori Party want this issue put to bed as smartly as possible and for the MPs to focus on the current issues of the day.”

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

MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi has been reinstated as a member of Te Pāti Māori, following an interim ruling by a high court judge, and will now attend the party’s Annual General Meeting this weekend.

The decision will be revisited at a full hearing in early February next year.

In a ruling published Friday afternoon, Justice Paul Radich said there were “serious questions to be tried” on the manner in which Kapa-Kingi was expelled from the party.

He said there were “certainly tenable arguments” that the expulsion was founded upon “mistaken facts and procedural irregularities”.

Justice Radich said he’s of the view there was a “position to preserve’. He acknowledged Kapa-King’s position in Parliament no longer reflects her election as an MP for Te Pāti Māori.

He pointed to practical considerations that weigh in favour of preserving her position as a member, such as access to party databases.

“While excluded, she and her staff can no longer access Te Pāti Māori database.

“Equally, the second applicant’s email address has been cancelled by the Pāti. That causes all sorts of issues for representation of the electorate,” said Justice Radich.

He also said Kapa-Kingi was not able to attend the AGM or other hui if she was not a member of the party.

“While the respondents have, in the assurances they have given, said that Ms Kapa-Kingi is welcome to attend the “protocol” session prior to the formal AGM – and that this is where the real discussion and pātai take place.

“That is a poor substitute for the full participation that would be open to her were she a member.”

Justice Radich’s decision to make an interim order pending the substantive hearing that will take place in February next year was released on Friday afternoon.

It followed Kapa-Kingi’s application for a temporary court order to reinstate her into the party and remove party president John Tamihere, which was heard by Justice Radich in the High Court at Wellington on Thursday morning.

Kapa-Kingi was expelled from the party, alongside Tākuta Ferris, in early November after a period of internal conflict.

The party’s co-leaders said the decision had been make in response to “serious breaches” of the party’s constitution, with both MPs fiercely disputing their expulsions.

She took the fight against her expulsion to court just days before the party’s AGM, taking place on Sunday in Rotorua, which she wasn’t able to attend in full following her expulsion.

The case

Kapa-Kingi’s lawyer Mike Colson KC said his client disputed how Te Pāti Māori’s constitution had been applied to two primary issues that had come to a head in recent months: a projected overspend on the Te Tai Tokerau budget and public statements made by her son Eru Kapa-Kingi.

Colson’s submissions were dense but focused on the party’s constitution and the step-by-step processes followed – or not followed – for the expulsion of Kapa-Kingi.

He submitted the national council meeting in which the decision to expel Kapa-Kingi was made wasn’t legitimate because her electorate was excluded from the hui.

On the decision itself, Colson said it had myriad issues, including the national council having no power to suspend or expel a member, the parliamentary funds in question not being party funds, there being no misuse of the funds (including for personal gain) and that a natural justice process had not been followed.

Tamihere’s lawyer Davey Salmon KC argued Kapa-Kingi’s assertion her case for legal intervention against her expulsion was “overwhelming” was was not borne out by the facts.

On the constitution, he said the national council did have authority to expel Kapa-Kingi as it was the “primary heavy lifter of hard decisions in this context”.

The constitution did not provide for a member to get a special disciplinary hearing and this was common practice used by other political parties, he said.

Salmon submitted there had been a quorum for the decision to expel Kapa-Kingi and that it was not relevant to suggest the funds in question were parliamentary funds, not party ones.

Allegations of misuse of funds were a “red rag to a bull” to certain media outlets and political opponents, and Te Pāti Māori had been determined to deal with them quickly, he said.

A more substantial hearing has been set down for 2 February 2026.

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 Oceans and Fisheries Minister has raised concerns about fish “heading to Te Waipounamu” due to warming waters.

“In my lifetime, we’re seeing the drift into the South Island of fisheries resources that have been historically located in the North Island,” Shane Jones said.

The minister appeared before the Primary Production select committee for Scrutiny Week on Friday morning, and was asked about his “favourite topic, climate change” by Green MP Teanau Tuiono.

“I did anticipate this question,” Jones responded.

In October, Tuiono had asked Jones about the risk posed by warming oceans to the sustainability of the fishing industry after the Our Marine Environment 2025 report showed the rate of warming in ocean waters around New Zealand was 34 percent faster than the global average warming rate.

Environment Minister Penny Simmonds also told Tuiono the report showed evidence that climate change was affecting primary industries including fisheries in a written parliamentary question.

The director of primary sector policy, Alastair Cameron, said during the hearing some fisheries were moving further south into “cooler waters”.

The Ministry for Primary Industries provided more information to RNZ, indicating marine heatwaves – that impact fish stocks – were becoming increasingly common in recent years. The ministry said it was a complex and developing issue and the exact way fish stocks were impacted was not fully yet understood.

MPI explained warmer waters meant species such as snapper and john dory may experience “shifts in their home range and overall productivity”.

Cameron said MPI considers the evidence and information about what impacts climate change could have on warming seas and the effect on fisheries and their distribution.

One of the responses to that work was looking at the regulatory systems, he said.

“How do we make those a bit more agile, a bit more flexible, to account for the changes that we might see.”

Jones said the fishing industry had asked and he had instructed officials to look at how to “cope” when big fishing boats were catching fish that was never there historically, and catching more because of the technology they use.

“If you’re catching a type of fish that’s historically not been present in a net, and you’re not able to bring it back to shore in a form that generates a good economic return, you are still being charged, through deemed value, a levy for having caught that fish.

“Now they’re not targeting it. It’s present because of changing water temperatures.”

He said smart regulatory responses that reflected oceanic changes were needed.

“We’ve got to have practical solutions, because the fish is heading to Te Waipounamu, e hoa,” Jones said.

He also joked he now needed “certain people in Te Tai Tokerau to follow the fish in the South Island”.

After the hearing, RNZ asked if the minister was alarmed to hear fish were migrating, to which Jones replied it was reflective of his “favourite subject, climate change – not”.

He said he was concerned if it imposed unnecessary burdens on the industry and they did not have the ability to deal with it.

Asked if the news gave him pause for thought around issues such as mining, he said he responded to the issue by requiring officials to “derive regulated responses on behalf of the state.”

“I don’t want to close down the economy to keep a few shrill voices in Dunedin happy.”

During the hearing, Jones also discussed the issue of public favour when it came to managing primary industries.

He spoke about an upcoming decision that was “more than likely” to stop the access of recreational and commercial people in New Zealand from taking crayfish from the entirety of Northland’s east coast.

“Those are very, very big decisions to make. But I’m making it.”

He said officials had used science and spoken to the public who had said “enough is enough. We have mined this resource to such a point it can’t survive if we stay on the current trajectory”.

“These decisions, they have to find public favour,” said Jones, but acknowledged later the public was not “of one mind”.

He said the government had “shifted the pendulum” so climate change was no longer regarded in quite the “polarising, ideological way” it had been.

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