Category: Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche says he would’ve sacked former Police Commissioner Andrew Coster “if I had to”.

He’s also revealed Coster will receive three months pay as part of his contract.

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.

In an interview with RNZ, Sir Brian was asked if Coster’s role was untenable.

“His role would have been very, very challenging, and that was the matter that we were working through. I never had to get to the end, because he decided, for professional and personal reasons, to offer his resignation, which I have accepted. That is in his best interest, and I believe it to be in my best interest.”

He said he would have sacked Coster “if I had to”.

“But I didn’t have to. It’s a theoretical thing, because he did the right thing. He exercised the accountability that I would expect of a public sector chief executive.”

Do you know more? Email sam.sherwood@rnz.co.nz

Coster was placed on leave following the IPCA’s report last month. Sir Brian said the pair had been engaged in conversations around his employment over the last three weeks.

“I had a number of questions that I needed to be satisfied on as to his ability to continue in his current role. Those questions came up from the IPCA. I had a number of them, as do many other people, I had the opportunity to put those directly to him and listen to his response, and I’ve done that without any level of predetermination, and as best as I could an open mind.”

The two men had a number of meetings in person and online.

“I was negotiating under my employment contract with him about his ability to perform the tasks that he had been recruited for as chief executive of the Social Investment Agency, all of the matters I thought relevant to that were considered in the process, and they were considered in my satisfaction to the point that he decided to offer his resignation, which I have accepted.”

Asked if there was ever a discussion about Coster returning to work, Sir Brian said “all options remained on the table”.

He said that it became apparent in his engagement with Coster last week that he was intending to resign.

“We have been engaged for three weeks in a process around employment. It was backwards and forwards between us. I had to make a decision. He had to make a decision, and all options were on the table. He took a view late last week that it was his intention to resign. I respect that, and we finalized that over the last few days.”

Sir Brian said Coster’s apology to those affected, including police and the woman who raised allegations about McSkimming was “extremely honourable”.

“I’m not sure what more he can do.”

Asked what Coster told him, Sir Brian said he acknowledged he realised after reading the IPCA report “how extensive the failures had been”.

“And although the IPCA found no evidence of corruption or collusion, if you look at it, there were failures in the systems, the processes and the delegations. And he was accountable for that. He’s accepted that accountability.”

Sir Brian said he was “really disappointed at a personal level that we’ve had to do this”.

“It’s been a very challenging process that needed to be done, but it’s had very high consequences for a person who, in his current role, was performing well, and the fact that he’s accepted accountability and responsibility speaks volumes for his values.”

He said no concerns had been raised with him about Coster’s leadership while at SIA.

Asked if he believed Coster should have got the job in the first place, Sir Brian said he believed he was “very well qualified for that role”.

“He had done a good role, but we’ve got to the point we have, and that is the way it is. I think it’s a very sad day for him and his family.”

[ h] Coster breaks silence

In a statement to RNZ, 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.”

Coster said it had been a “very challenging time” for his family and himself.

“The support we have received has been deeply appreciated. I have devoted my professional life to the service of others – it is my intention to do so again at some point in the future.”

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 Greens say the number of applications for advanced support being denied has “skyrocketed” during the last year and people are being denied assistance for basic essentials.

But the Minister for Social Development Louise Upston says there’s been no policy change and she’s not concerned because “advances create greater hardship down the track”.

Data provided by the minister shows the number of declined applications for payment advances to help with clothing has doubled and declines for help with electricity costs has more than doubled compared to the quarter ending June 2023.

Advance payments of a benefit is a one-off payment to help pay for essential or emergency costs. MSD can help with costs such as electricity, dental treatment, essential home repairs, glasses, washing machines, car repairs and more.

Between June 2023 and June 2025 there has been an increase in declined applications of:

• 72% for appliances: 327 applications declined in June 2023 compared to 564 declined in June 2025
• 91% for bedding: 366 compared to 699
• 82% for beds: 375 compared to 684
• 65% for car repairs: 1551 compared to 2556
• 102% for clothing: 1515 compared to 3060
• 36% for dental treatment: 1317 compared to 1785
• 160% for electricity: 300 compared to 780
• 83% for essential home repairs: 54 compared to 99
• 52% for fridge/ freezer: 219 compared to 333
• 86% for furniture: 342 compared to 636

Some of the most common reasons these applications are denied include whether the circumstances could have reasonably been foreseen, the person had already received help for the same or similar need in the past, or that it wasn’t a qualifying need.

The reason advances were declined because circumstances could have been reasonably foreseen, and declined because it was not a qualifying need, have both doubled compared to June 2023.

Upston appeared before the Social Services Committee during Scrutiny Week, where Green MP Ricardo Menendez March asked why the decline for advances for assistance like clothing and electricity had “skyrocketed” under the past financial year.

He asked whether the minister was “comfortable” with increased unemployment and hardship in communities while decline rates had doubled.

Upston said she was aware there had been an increase in the number of declines, but confirmed there had been no policy change in regards to granting advances.

Her key concern though was the nature of advance payments themselves, because it meant people had less than their benefit in the weeks from then on.

“I’m not sure that benefit advance is necessarily a good idea when people turn up to MSD with challenges.”

Upston said she would be surprised if Menendez March was advocating for a larger number of advances because “that pushes people into more financial hardship in the weeks and months ahead”.

Menendez March said people access advances because they “just simply cannot make ends meet and cover the costs in front of them”. He said advances were one of the few tools to prevent people losing access to electricity, for example.

Upston acknowledged “we’ve got very challenging times,” and “no one around this table would be surprised” there are people who are finding the cost of living challenging at the moment, “which is why it is the primary focus of our government to get it under control.”

“We need to stick with our plan focusing on reducing inflation and reducing the cost of living, but I accept that there will be households who are finding it tough right now.”

Asked by reporters after the Scrutiny Week hearing why there had been an increase in declines, Upston said that was a question for MSD. RNZ has approached MSD for comment.

She said she wasn’t concerned about the increase, and when asked why she wasn’t concerned, repeated that “advances create greater hardship down the track in the weeks and months ahead”.

“It may well have been that they were too lenient in the past, but as I said, there have been no policy changes around any form of hardship.”

Asked whether MSD was taking cues from the government’s rhetoric of getting tougher on beneficiaries, Upston rejected that assumption.

“We are focused on reducing the number of people on job seeker benefit and supporting them into work.”

Menendez March told RNZ under Upston’s watch more people were being declined assistance for “basic essentials.”

“At a time of a cost of living crisis, it’s morally corrupt to run a regime where more people are being declined for assistance.

“Advances are often a last lifeline for people in hardship unable to cover the cost of bills, clothes and bedding which allows them to live dignified lives.”

Government target ‘at risk’

The chief executive of the Ministry of Social Development, Debbie Power, also appeared before MPs for questioning.

NZ First’s Jamie Arbuckle asked whether MSD was on track to meet the government’s goal to reduce Jobseeker numbers to 140,000 by 2030.

Power responded that it was “fair to say” the target was “probably a bit at risk”.

“That’s what you would expect given the economic conditions. But what I can say is we are absolutely committed to ensuring that New Zealanders and our clients get access to jobs as they come up.”

Power said 42 percent of people who came on a benefit last year in New Zealand were “really highly skilled”, so it was important to make sure they get access to jobs in the labour market.

“And when the economy turns making sure our clients are at the front of the queue to take advantage of their economic recovery is something that we are absolutely committed to.”

Power was also asked by Labour’s Priyanca Radhakrishnan whether changes to jobseeker payments for 18 and 19 year olds would get the government closer to that target.

From November next year, young people wanting to get Jobseeker Support or the equivalent Emergency Benefit will have to take a parental income test, to see whether their parents can support them instead of the taxpayer.

Power said she didn’t think that was the “intent” of the policy, but acknowledged MSD was expecting 4000 18 and 19 year olds to be impacted by the change.

National’s Paulo Garcia also asked for an update on the government’s traffic-light warning system, which sets out clear consequences for beneficiaries who fail to meet certain requirements.

Jobseekers will have to reapply for the benefit every six months – instead of annually – and any transgressions will remain on their record for two years, twice as long as they do now.

The law change will also allow new sanctions, such as mandatory community work or money management payment cards.

Power said currently, 98.5 percent – 345,000 people – were in the green setting, meaning “no problems, meeting obligations, all good”.

There are 0.6 percent – 1,953 people – in orange, and 1 percent – 3,189 people – in red. She acknowledged that was a small number of people. Power said what she’d heard from the front line was that staff and clients appreciated the transparency of the colour arrangements to better understand what was expected of them.

In regards to the mandatory community work or money management payment cards – the non-financial sanctions MSD had been able to apply in the last six months since the law came into force – Menendez March asked how many had been applied.

Power said there’d been about “a dozen.”

Menendez March said the minister often spoke about these sanctions as being a “better alternative”, and questioned why only 12 had been applied while financial sanctions had remained the majority.

Power said there was particular criteria in terms of accessing non-financial sanctions, such as being in case management, having dependent children, failing an obligation then attending an appointment with the case manager.

“It significantly reduces the size of people where those sorts of sanctions will apply.

“So it’s a tool that we can use for the right circumstances.”

Menendez March pushed back, asking “if only 12 people have been given a non-financial sanction, does that say that the circumstances are almost never right?”

Power rejected that saying it was because “we’re just starting.”

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

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The ACT Party’s chief of staff has announced his resignation, after more than a decade in Parliament.

In a LinkedIn post, Andrew Ketels said he felt “very fortunate” to have worked at Parliament for 12 years, for five ministers, and as ACT’s chief of staff for five years.

“There really is no place like it, but I’m looking forward to making a bit more time for my two boys,” he said.

Ketels said he was “extremely proud” of how far the party had come over the last eight years, “from a party struggling to make the 6pm news and polling below 1% to a caucus of 11 MPs and sitting at the Cabinet table”.

Ketels said he would be finishing up this month “to move on to my next challenge”.

Prior to joining David Seymour’s office in 2017, Ketels had worked for National MPs Louise Upston and Maggie Barry.

Ketels is not the only party chief of staff to step down this year, after the Greens’ Eliza Prestidge-Oldfield resigned in September.

She was replaced by former Green MP Kevin Hague, who started in the role last month.

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