The new three party coalition government will feature Winston Peters as Deputy Prime Minister for the first-half of its three-year term, and David Seymour for the second half.
The NZ First leader will also be Minister of Foreign Affairs, with the ACT Party leader Minister for Regulation.
The 20-member Cabinet will have 14 National Ministers, three ACT Ministers and three NZ First Ministers. National Party Deputy Leader Nicola Willis will be Minister of Finance, ACT's Brooke van Velden will be Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety, and Shane Jones will be Minister for Regional Development.
There will also be five ministers from National, two from ACT and one from NZ First outside Cabinet
As part of National’s agreement with NZ First, its proposed foreign house buyer tax won't go ahead. However, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says National's proposed tax package will "continue to be funded through a combination of spending reprioritisation and additional revenue measures."
"Policy changes will help offset the loss of revenue from that change. National’s fiscal plan also had buffers which give confidence that tax reduction can still be funded responsibly," Luxon says.
"The coalition parties have adopted ACT’s policy to speed up the rate at which interest deductibility for rental properties is restored."
Pledges in the National-ACT agreement include disestablishing the Productivity Commission, rewriting the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act "to protect vulnerable consumers without unnecessarily limiting access to credit," amending the Overseas Investment Act "to limit ministerial decision making to national security concerns and make such decision making more timely," reforming market studies introduced by the Commerce Amendment Act "to focus on reducing regulatory barriers to new entrants to drive competition."
Also; restoring mortgage interest deductibility for rental properties with a 60% deduction in 2023/24, 80% in 2024/25, and 100% in 2025/26, repeal the clean car discount, narrow the Reserve Bank's monetary policy mandate to price stability by removing the second target of maximum sustainable employment, take advice on replacing "medium term" with specific time targets, repeal the Fair Pay Agreement regime by Christmas 2023, expand 90-day trials to apply to all businesses, legislate to make the medium density residential standards (MDRS0 optional for councils, with the need for councils to ratify any use of MDRS, including existing zones, and work with Auckland Council to implement time of use road charging to reduce congestion and improve travel time reliability.
Pledges in the National-NZ First agreement include; keeping the superannuation age at 65, investigating the reopening of Marsden Point Refinery, progress work examining connecting the railway to Marsden Point and Northport from the Northern Main Truck Line, progress a business case for a dry dock at Marsden Point to service domestic and international shipping needs and to support Navy vessels, require the electricity regulator to implement regulations "such that there is sufficient electricity infrastructure to ensure security of supply and avoid excessive prices," and ensure climate change policies "are aligned and do not undermine national energy security."
The agreement also says a select committee inquiry into banking competition will be established, with "broad and deep criteria" to focus on competitiveness, customer services, and profitability. The new government will also "explore options to strengthen the powers of the Grocery Commissioner, to improve competitiveness, and to address the lack of a third entrant to remove the market power of a duopoly."
And; stop the current review Emissions Trading Scheme review "to restore confidence and certainty to the carbon trading market," progress work to recognise other forms of carbon sequestration, including blue carbon, incentivise the uptake of emissions reduction mitigations, such as low methane genetics, and low methane producing animal feed, support farm environment plans administered by regional councils and targeted at a catchment level, adopt standardised farm level reporting, "cut red tape and regulatory blocks" on irrigation, water storage, managed aquifer recharge and flood protection schemes.
Plus; establish a National Infrastructure Agency under the direction of relevant Ministers to coordinate government funding, connect investors with NZ infrastructure, and improve funding, procurement, and delivery to "prioritise strategic infrastructure to improve the resilience of heavy industry in New Zealand," and establish a Regional Infrastructure Fund with $1.2 billion in capital funding over the Parliamentary term.
National will nominate Gerry Brownlee to be Speaker.
Other roles include Chris Bishop as Minister of Housing, Minister for Infrastructure, and Minister Responsible for RMA Reform, Shane Reti Minister of Health, Simeon Brown Minister for Energy, Minister for Transport and Minister of Local Government, Erica Stanford Minister of Education and Minister of Immigration, Paul Goldsmith Minister of Justice, Minister for State Owned Enterprises and Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Judith Collins Attorney General, Minister of Defence and Minister for Digitising Government, Todd McClay Minister of Agriculture and Minister of Forestry, Simon Watts Minister of Climate Change and Minister of Revenue outside Cabinet, and Andrew Bayly Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing and Minister of Statistics, also outside Cabinet.
The full ministerial list is here.
The National-ACT agreement is here.
The National-NZ First agreement is here.
Luxon's statement is below.
National, ACT and New Zealand First to deliver for all New Zealanders
The new coalition government of National, ACT and New Zealand First will be stable, effective and will deliver for all New Zealanders, National Leader and incoming Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says.
“Despite the challenging economic environment, New Zealanders can look forward to a better future because of the changes the new Government will make,” Mr Luxon says.
“I said on election night that we would be a government that would deliver for every New Zealander, regardless of who we are, where we are and whatever our life circumstances. How the coalition parties do that has been at the core of our negotiations.
“New Zealanders have put their trust in us. In return, we trust New Zealanders. We believe in this country. We are ambitious for it. We know that, with the right leadership, the right policies and the right direction, together New Zealanders can make this an even better country.”
The three-party coalition government is the first in New Zealand’s MMP history, with all parties represented in Cabinet.
- New Zealand First Leader Rt Hon Winston Peters will be Deputy Prime Minister for the first half of the three-year Parliamentary term
- ACT Leader David Seymour will be Deputy Prime Minister for the second half of the term
- Mr Peters will be Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Mr Seymour Minister for Regulation.
- The 20-strong Cabinet will have 14 National Ministers, three ACT Ministers and three New Zealand First Ministers
- Nicola Willis will be Minister of Finance, Brooke van Velden will be Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety and Hon Shane Jones will be Minister for Regional Development
- There will be five ministers from National, two from ACT and one from New Zealand First outside Cabinet
- ACT and New Zealand First will each have one Parliamentary Under-Secretary
“The Government will manage a strong economy that will ease the cost of living and deliver tax relief, restore law and order, deliver better public services and strengthen democracy.
“The coalition documents between National and ACT, and National and New Zealand First, provide for both ACT and New Zealand First to support the major elements of National’s policy programme including our 100-day plan, our 100-point economic plan, and our tax and fiscal plans, with some adjustments.
“The National and ACT agreement provides that the Government will progress a range of ACT initiatives, and these will be supported by New Zealand First. Equally, the National and New Zealand First coalition agreement outlines a range of New Zealand First priorities, which will be supported by ACT.
“The coalition parties believe people should be rewarded for their effort and hard-working Kiwis should keep more of what they earn. National campaigned on that commitment and, next July, the Government will deliver it.
“The tax package will continue to be funded through a combination of spending reprioritisation and additional revenue measures. However, as part of National’s agreement with New Zealand First, the proposed foreign buyer tax will no longer go ahead. Policy changes will help offset the loss of revenue from that change. National’s fiscal plan also had buffers which give confidence that tax reduction can still be funded responsibly.
“The coalition parties have adopted ACT’s policy to speed up the rate at which interest deductibility for rental properties is restored.
“Delivering tax relief is just one part of the Government’s plan to rebuild the economy. The Government will ease the cost of living, reduce wasteful spending, and lift economic growth to increase opportunities and prosperity for all New Zealanders.”
“Restoring law and order will be as important to the Government as it is to the public. In addition to National’s policies to tackle gangs and youth crime, the parties have agreed with ACT to re-write the Arms Act, and agreed with New Zealand First to train no fewer than 500 new Police.
“Part of treating taxpayers’ money with respect is getting better value from public services. We will set targets, like shorter wait times in hospitals, and public services will be delivered on the basis of need.
“To lift educational performance, every class will undertake an hour a day each of reading, writing and maths. The parties have agreed to adopt ACT’s policies to reintroduce partnership schools and to allow state schools to become partnership schools.
Other key policies in the agreements include:
- A new agency, accountable to the Minister for Regulation, will assess the quality of new and existing regulation. This agency, proposed by ACT, will be funded by disestablishing the Productivity Commission
- A Regional Infrastructure Fund, proposed by New Zealand First, that will have $1.2 billion in capital funding
“I thank the public for their patience since Election Day. It’s a credit to our country that we now handle the MMP process with such calm and maturity.
“I also thank the caretaker government for their assistance during the transition period.
“It’s exciting to be on the cusp of delivering a big policy programme with two coalition partners who, alongside National, are determined to make New Zealanders’ lives better.
“On election night, I said that we’d listened to the public and heard a description of a better New Zealand. New Zealanders want change that makes our lives easier. We want change that improves our opportunities. We want change that makes this great country even better. The Government is going to deliver that change and we are ready to get on with it.”
239 Comments
Many voted for National based on this policy. But it was unlikely to occur if NZF was a partner. So National no longer has to meet the targets of one of their key policies that got them voted in, and where the numbers were critised by experts for not adding up. Plus National can now blame he public for not giving National more votes to avoid this happening, and it basically gives them a get out a jail free card for many things moving forward.
Two quick questions Jimbo:
1. Is opening a portal for channeling the proceeds of corruption to our shores a good look for NZ?
2. What's wrong with supporting the regions? Jones may be a dick but some of the things he enabled under the last Labour-led Government worked for those most affected by Aucklandisation.
He's actually right though. Landlords had been shifting to renting to government agencies, because interest is still deductible in that case. So private renters were facing :
- less rental availability
- higher rents to cover the deductibility shortfall
We can have whatever rules and regs we want, but ultimately the man on the street is paying for them.
No, because interest was only deductible for 20 years for new builds.
-> Which reduces the price you can sell it for in 10 years to the next person.
-> Which reduces the price you can afford to pay today. Not by much, but by a non-zero amount.
The net effect of the policy is less rentals in both new and existing properties, suspension of generally accepted accounting principles to target a politically convenient industry (this is biggest concern in long run tbh) and slightly less investment in housing overall.
All in all an absolutely terrible policy. The fact people are saying ridiculous things like 'tax breaks for landlords' shows just how strong the propaganda machine is.
And dont forget Labour quintupled the public housing waitlist, so now instead of private landlords subsidising private tenants, the taxpayer is paying for [mostly] brand new "warm and dry" homes for all these people. Not to mention the $365M a year being spent on emergency motel housing. 100% guarantee the cost of doing that far outweighs any "tax break' landlords got.
I believe the argument was clear that under Labour, the waitlist for social housing has gone through the roof at the same time as enormous spending has been done for 'temporary' accomodation such as motels etc with little to show for it apart from a negative impact on social cohesion for the surrounding communities.
Were we to delve deeper we could assert that the RBNZ's decisions that allowed house prices to skyrocket through removal of LVR and fro the LSAP and FLP, resulted in many rentals sold off to owner occupiers as the vendors cashed in, and therefore booted the tenants out, thus adding to the shortage of rentals and increasing the demand for social housing. Pray we see Orr sacked sooner rather than later.
So the owner occupier who bought the house from the landlord, did they just appear from nowhere or were they possibly previously tenants? If there are less landlord owned houses that means less tenants and more owner occupiers. Your argument only works if there are more people living under one roof renting than as owner occupiers.
But rents have been dictated by the market, not by costs. Using that argument, when interest rates rise, then rents should increase by the same amount. But that hasn't happened. The finance minister even said that he didn't expect the charge to result in higher rents when he removed the interest deductbility. Maybe the media could ask him that question now if he still believes that is the case .
I have second hand embarrassment for those three, never have I felt such utter cringe about our elected leaders. Sure, I loathed Ardern in her final months but she didn't make me cringe with embarrassment.
Like 5 year olds squabbling over who gets the last ice block, Luxon had to break it in half and give them each a piece. And how will we pay for the tax breaks now the foreign buyer ban being lifted in $2m+ has gone? Actually it won't matter as the numbers were a work of fiction anyway.
This is going to be entertaining.
It's an unnecessary and largely irrelevant role and it tell's you everything about just how deeply flawed Seymour and Peters are that they both coveted it.
They could have had a meaty cabinet role, showed some real leadership and starting mucking in, but oh no they needed the title. I have nothing but contempt for both of them. I don't envy Luxon working with these two over-promoted narcissists.
Agreed. Winston was no surprise; it is what he has done before. But I wasted my vote on Seymour - a few years I saw him at a presentation on the assisted dying bill he was pushing and I was impressed - he was pushing an idea that would win him few votes and lose him some. He is coherent good public speaker. So he got my vote despite my priority being reducing legal immigration to levels of average OECD countries (about 2/3rds) but no party has ever proposed planning for population growth nor kept its word when suggesting immigration targets.
Now after my vote and only hours of attaining power I find:
1. I'm supporting faster interest deductibility (should have been frozen at 50% - as an owner of two properties I know it works by taxing those who are wealthy enough to be landlords and thus reducing prices for new owner occupiers)
2. Treaty referendum - Seymour is right that the treaty can't just be endlessly reinterpreted by unelected academics and judges in some eternal process. Let's agree what it meant in the past (say Sir Apirana Ngata's explanation) and more important what it means now. But a referendum is very dumb - they always end up as a vote of approval disapproval of the govt . My French father-in-law voted against De Gaulle's proposal for greater regional political powers in France - he said to me it was a good idea but I as a socialist I had to vote against. Similar when I voted for our flag - I was happy to have a change but didn't like the choice. And Brexit.
3. A man who thinks deputy prime minister is more important for NZ's future than the minister of Education
4 Disestablishing the Productivity Commission instead of being radical and becoming the first govt to listen to it.
Shane Jones as Minister for Regional Development LOL.
https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/06/12/national-threatens-pgf-cuts-after-dam…
The Auditor-General’s office has delivered a stinging critique of the Provincial Growth Fund ‘reset’, saying inadequate risk management and a flawed assessment process mean it cannot be sure the fund’s investments will represent value for money.
The National Party has suggested staff involved in the reset may be among those to face the axe as part of a public sector clear-out should it win the election.
"However, as part of National’s agreement with New Zealand First, the proposed foreign buyer tax will no longer go ahead."
Expected but its gotta hurt saying it out loud.
Reads to me like Winston owned those negotiations, he'll be chuckling in his red wine this evening.
The cynic in me thinks National may have been indifferent to the fate of its foreign buyer tax. It was always first on the chopping block if they needed Winny to from a coalition. It served its purpose, it got some swing voters to flip to National. Now it can be happily discarded.
Exactly guttman, and I had hoped they might get rid of several other "commissions" at the same time. The idea of a Parliamentary appointee who has expertise in the field and who can point out deficiencies in the performance of the government of the day, is superficially attractive.
The reality is not. Firstly a lot of the appointees (ex mayor/prominent sportswoman/et al) really had nothing other than their presumed objectivity to contribute. Some are frankly just retread politicians being given a retirement handout.
And particularly, in my opinion parliamentary commissioners detract from the proper role of His Majesty's loyal Ooposition to bring inadequacies of the reigning government to public notice via debates in Parliament and through constructive work on Select Committees.
We seem in effect, to be paying two parties to do a similar job.
History[edit]
The New Zealand Productivity Commission Act, passed in December 2010, created the commission as an independent Crown entity. It was established as a condition of the ACT Party supporting the National Party government on confidence and supply, with Finance Minister Bill English describing it as working "closely with and be closely modelled on" the Australian Productivity Commission.[2] The commission began operating on 1 April 2011.
Let's cut bureaucracy by *checks notes* creating a new bureaucracy..
Headed by a person who has no experience of government and what bureaucracies do.
I suspect this will be very much like Wayne Brown, coming in saying we're going to cut all that wasteful bureaucracy and then finding out oh shit most of that bureaucracy is working hard and efficiently at making the city better, it's the pork barrel politicians that are actual causing the wastage...
Seymour probably read one of their reports, say:
New Zealand businesses are typically capital-shallow (ie, workers have limited equipment and other capital goods to work with) and this has held down labour productivity. Historically, this has been partly explained by the high off-the-shelf cost of capital goods, past periods of high long-term real interest rates, and fast population growth. Low returns to investment, low wages and ready access to low-cost immigrant labour are also contributing factors.
Can't have people opposing his party policy of low wage migration and housing investment.
https://www.productivity.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Final-report-Frontier…
Nah, they're spending the money saved from disestablishing the PC (the start of of which was an earlier ACT party coalition initiative) to now funding David Seymour's new Regulations Ministry instead.
A re-branding exercise of sorts - no fiscal savings to apply to the restoration of tax incentives for landlords..
What a brilliant, brilliant, brilliant speech by Luxon. Yes it has taken a while to form the government but it's impressive how much detail has already been agreed upon by the three parties. Love the move towards more personal responsibility. There now is great hope for New Zealand to stop sliding into the abyss.
Finally a comment that makes sense, after so much whining and baseless complaining.
I loved a lot of the detailed coalition agreement, especially the removal of the RBNZ dual mandate (therefore limiting its focus to price stability), the removal of the ban of gas and oil exploration, the removal of the co-governance BS, the move towards a reduction of central government head-count back to 2017 levels, the expansion of the 90-day trial period, the disestablishment of the Maori health authority, the introduction of sanction for beneficiaries who can work but do not want to work, the liberalisation of genetic engineering laws, a focus on free speech etc....
If they implement at least a significant portion of their agreement, NZ is going to return to a first-world country.
Imagine if Labour had delivered such a detailed plan within 6 weeks of winning an election. Actually detailing the things that would be done, and when, so that voters can hold them accountable if they dont get delivered. Maybe this should be a compulsory Parliamentary requirement for every incoming Govt?
Detailed plan? Seems to be a lot of new spending and a lot less tax revenue, where is the detail of how they will pay for it?
National's tax cuts alone cost $3,151 million per year, they would have to sack 31,510 public servants earning $100k just to pay for that. Then there are the prisons, police, Shane Jones fund, interest deductions, etc.
Considering most on job seeker have severe disabilities, they actually want work but wishes and fairies do not make accessible jobs for those with disabilities magically appear. Try doing fruit picking when you cannot lift your arms due to genetic disease killing your muscles and no wheelchair access to most businesses and fields. American companies are far more likely to hire NZders with disabilities. You could be out of work for years if you were applying in NZ. The sad thing is disabled NZders are very much stuck here and most cannot move to Australia or America. So the access to jobs with companies that do hire disabled people (even where the disability has absolutely no effect on work or performance) is zlich in much of NZ. So much so we still think of any disabled person with a job only receiving it through charity and not say the decades of experience and high levels of skills they hold and making it through the same interview process as everyone else.
It is rare to find disabled people who are Allowed to complete NCEA with enough requirements and Allowed to have access to higher training. OVER 50% of disabled youth are NEET (not in education employment or training) because they are NOT ALLOWED ACCESS. Think on that it is worse than a coin flip for disabled youth to even have access to high school or university to start (where EVERY child and youth should have access to education enshrined in equal rights). Think of how bad it is for them to then try to have access to businesses. It changes a lot when you think that a disabled person allowed to enter University, and then are able to find an employer to hire them literally does put them in the nicknamed 1%, the LUCKY ones. The NZ Bill of Rights openly allows discrimination against the disabled in housing, employment, healthcare, and education. So Yeah you can take your "its a choice" & disabled people chose to be disabled personal responsibility bullshit and really put it back up where the sun doesn't shine and your other eugenic ideas float about.
There are going to be some massive spending cuts coming to pay for all this. Return of interest deduction, tax cuts, Shane Jones fund, no foreign property tax, 500 more police, longer prison sentences, etc.
I wonder if it is even possible, if they cut every single bureaucrat including themselves, would that pay for the above?
It's not possible. They simply won't be able to achieve even the proposed spending cuts at the level that included the forecast income from the foreign buyers tax.
And these coalition agreements include more spending, not less. All the 'less' is a twinkle in the neo-liberal eyes amongst them.
Nicola Willis is in for a shock - as she'll shoulder all the blame as the debt spiral continues in the downwards direction.
There is possibly one hidden plan in all of the announcements - that being that she is also the Minister for Social Investment. A new portfolio altogether - a continuation of the Bill English ideology for ridding NZ of the many recent additions to its social safety net (i.e., the "few dead rats" he had to swallow all those years ago).
Note also that the Minister for Social Development, Louise Upton is also the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector. Outsourcing the welfare state could be on the agenda (i.e., boost money to foodbanks whilst reducing WFF payouts and qualification thresholds.. that sort of thing). All a part of furthering the middle class squeeze.
But, just a wild guess. If they can't raise enough from austerity of the public servants, then you have to move onto austerity of the public services.
Raising GST is more politically unpalatable than lowering benefits.
Willis will soon be taking her advice from Ruth Richardson. Ruth's been making the media rounds lately (like a vulture ready to swoop in on some new lucrative government contracts);
I think she even fronted as a guest panelist for one of the networks on election night. She can "smell" the opening she's been waiting for!
It's a tough one isn't it.
One would think that by removing some of the "corporate" welfare - WFF, Accommodation Supplement etc, The Market will have to adapt and adjust with lower prices and/or higher wages. Of course the tax avoidance model will have to change too.
The other issue is that WINZ and Social Investment agencies also need to realise that the punishment and penalise model will not encourage the best attitude. There needs to be a whole lot more holistic and wrap around support for those failed by the education system, by their upbringing etc. I think there are many who feel let down by society and find it difficult to see their place in it. Rather than just having a job many need something more meaningful and fulfilling, something they see a future in and that they're suitable to, that helps them grow as a person. Many have not had this guidance to see themselves positively and our society and education systems in many ways hasn't helped. I don't think NACT have any awareness of this.
Yes, well you are right that WFF and Accommodation supplements are an indirect form of corporate welfare - employers benefiting from the first and landlords from the latter.
But, of course the government (local and central) both have a lot of employees who qualify for WFF and A/S, e.g.,
https://www.payscale.com/research/NZ/Industry=Local_Government/Salary
Particularly, singles and solo parents - so the 'market' response needs to also take into account the effect on government employment.
It's why I thought the government should look for a way to first unwind the accommodation supplement by regulating market rents. You have to look at ways to unwind that don't exacerbate a wage/price spiral.
No easy answers. Perhaps the best example of rapid removal of government subsidies is the farming sector in the Lange/Douglas years. It's a case study in how long and in what way, a market/society adjusts..
please do something about the local government bodies and councils.
Wellington is out of control! they took away part of the roads in courtney place to put ugly port plants instead of parkings, blocked the perfect wide Freyberg St in Lyallbay for pathetic excuse of road safty even though not even there has been no accident there at all. they spend millions to build up cycle lanes though the water pipes are bursting and leaking. I wonder why we let wellington slip to slumps this way.
That's what local body elections are for - there was literally one last year. If that's what the residents of Wellington vote for that's their perogative and their bed to lie in, central government shouldn't be deciding what rates are used for as that is a very slippery slope (wasn't that half the outrage about 3 waters in the first place?).
Trains that deny disabled people access, like your idea that a disability can magically be cured so they can walk and cycle by wishes and fairies. Yeah I think not, can you guess why a disabled person who is denied access to public transport does not take public transport. I will give you a couple of days to attempt to answer that one.
Ironically the time is infinite because they are now denying access infinitely to disabled people to whole streets. Even Te Papa has changed significantly to be very inaccessible if you have the unfortunate need to go to conferences there (no disabled parking available most of the time and literally blocked off). Imagine if everyone who could walk had to pay the same costs as disabled people for access and literally denied access to most of Wellington streets and businesses. We are very lucky most disabled people are so poor and barely surviving many cannot even get access to protest let alone to places of higher education and employment.
Higher local rates coming out way as council will see a credit downgrade
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/sp-warns-nationals-bid-to-ditch-thr…
On immigration, the Act-National agreement commits to increase the cap on the number of seasonal workers, as well as introducing a "five-year, renewable parent category visa, conditional on covering healthcare costs, with consideration of a public healthcare levy".
Employers will no longer be required to pay those on skilled migrant category visas the median wage.
It will also be easier for family members of visa holders to work in New Zealand, beginning with Skilled Migrant Category visa holders.
So much for Seymour's bold assertation “Yeah, look, it's impossible to see us sitting around the Cabinet table.” (regarding working with NZF)
Easy to be principled when you don't think you'll actually have to follow through, and makes him look like a bit of a clown, of course when push came to shove he wasn't going to pass up the opportunity for important positions because Winnie was there too.
Good, now they may get a taste of what it is like for the private sector, you know the ones that pay the taxes and pay their wages. Cause in the private sector if you are crap at your job or industry you won't survive, hopefully this filters through the public service.
Cut all new road spending would be the most productive way to make savings, oh hang on no, let's build more roads. Cut the people who design and build the roads so now we'll use consultancies that cost 3 times as much but hey you know those consultancies are headed by very rich people who give us lots of money.
I suppose the comparison will be against Labour's three years of having an absolute majority and what they achieved, or didn't, and what a coalition of three can achieve or not.
The coalition has the second advantage as Labour has given them a very low baseline from which it will be easy to show improvement.
LOL - it's not a Ministry per se. I suspect it means he will have oversight of Fish & Game (the licensing organisation).
They've been (in the eyes of the neoliberal set) overly active in using the proceeds of licensing to protect the environment (i.e., lobbying on water quality issues, joining in legal battles, for protection of the Hauraki Gulf, for example, etc. etc.).
That will now end - I expect they'll be "defunded" via executive fiat with the assistance of ACT's Brooke van Velden in Internal Affairs.
A fish and hunt free-for-all I suspect.
Again, just guessing!
.
Winston is likely best as a foreign minister, he has tack and experience and represents NZ well to form healthy international relations... but also famously able to say NO, which we also need
I think having him as part time deputy works ok, as he will keep Seymours head in check...
He's aging so may not be interested in that much travel but I think he's an asset in that space
Age is just a number...
The Rolling Stones Announce 2024 North American Tour! - The Rolling Stones | Official Website
And neither is the Minister for the Environment.
That will be one of the first re-structures (downsizing) out of the blocks - as they grew exponentially during the period of working on the replacement resource management system. Those redundancies (and all the others to follow) are going to be big up-front costs in Years 1 and 2. I wonder how much of that cost will be reflected in the mini-budget we have coming up.
It did get absurd, but there will be a cost in redundancies to unwind the absurdity. And when running a big re-structure like that - they normally hire in consultants to run the change project - another cost as these things are time/bureaucracy gone mad.
Look at the universities for an example - so many have been working on their restructure proposals for a couple of years now.
Since when should wasteful government jobs be a charitable employment scheme, Kate?
The cost of all those wasteful jobs means less money for desperately needed frontline services.
Yes there’s short term costs. But eventually if you get to the point of saving a billion dollars a year - that really adds up. Remember it’s not just the cost of salaries saved, it’s also office space, power etc.
But the reality is often that the "back office admin" gets transferred to the frontline services to do.
Not saying we don't have overly bloated Ministries, but it's not the big salaried jobs that will go. And the big salaried will still expect the data/stats and reporting to come from somewhere 'down the ranks'.
It happened the last time there were major upheavals in education - you might recall all the complaints from front line teachers and principals about their extra admin workload that either 'ate' into their student-contact and teaching - or got taken home to finish at night.
All I'm saying is the short term costs come by way of redundancies and stress on those remaining in the system while waiting for the recruitment of the promised, front-line "cavalry" to arrive. And often, a bit like the Alamo, it never does.
Perhaps my maths, is wrong but I think to save a billion a year on an average salary of $75,000 makes for approximately 13,000-odd redundancies? Each of which will get a minimum of 3 months salary on leaving + all their accrued annual leave.
I'm just saying the numbers needed to make National's proposed cuts (not to mention the new hole created by NZ First's veto on the 15% property tax on foreigners and the extra $1.5 billion to Shane Jones' regional development fund), are likely too great for this incoming to achieve - our debt will grow over their three-year term, not decline.
Just a guess, of course.
He'd be dumb to do that again, as when he turned on his own coalition partner last time during an election period - he found himself out of Parliament. But of course, he went after what at the time was a popular government... if this one proves unpopular and/or incompetent - yes, all bets are off.
Generally accepted accounting principles ripe for abuse because unlike other businesses, landlords can generally survive with zero cashflow because it's a) not a full time job and b) negative gearing in the short term generally leads to capital gains in the long term. Therefore, these "tax breaks" are given to people who may never actually end up paying tax, unlike real businesses with PAYE and because real businesses have less certainty around cashflow they will generally aim for profit, not break even.
Oh you mean a CGT. I'm all in favour of a broad-based CGT. What most kiwis want, however, is a CGT that only applies to investments that other people own. You would also need an inheritance tax, to avoid people just holding an asset through to death to create a tax-free inheritance, so not only is it now a tax on your own retirement investments, it's also on the 1/3 of a house you'll pick up when Mum passes.
You will not find as much savings as you think there HM. Salaries are a small proportion of govt expenditure and keep people employed. If they go 2 things happen: you pay twice as much for them when they come back as consultants or they don't get rehired and go on the dole and you end up paying them benefits.
If you want big savings look at new roading infrastructure and super.
Benefits would typically be a third or less of typical government policy advisor salaries. And why do you need a consultant instead if the work the policy advisor was doing was always a laughable waste of resource?
And why is it ‘either/or’? I agree many of their roading projects are a massive waste of money. But so are many of the bureaucrats. I can speak from experience, doing some contract work for MBIE in 2018. Just absurd wastage.
If you cut both areas of waste imagine what could be done in frontline health, education and housing.
Waste is waste that can be spent on better things, regardless of whether it is the absurd proliferation of policy advisor roles, or dumb roading projects. Or white elephants like the light rail.
True, but look at the flip side these policy advisors are most likely people with families. I don't think they hoodwinked the Government into creating a role especially for them.
Let's say you cut 10% of the public sector "waste", you've saved $600 million. Great. Then next year our non-means tested superannuation costs go up another $1 billion. If we want to save $600 million, I'm sure 3% of superannuants could probably do without the pocket money?
Just remember this when your service levels with anything central government go downhill quite dramatically. Or you find that this government cancelled a whole stack of upgrade projects so we are stuck with creaking systems 10 years past their planned end of life dates.
People I know at Stats who were working on some big projects to improve the basic businesses and were halfway through their projects are now being asked to look for new jobs. Their projects would likely have made Stats way more efficient, but its back to the old way of doing things now. Inefficient and person intensive, expensive to run and prone to errors which you have to have more people to recheck for errors. The project to fix all that is being shit canned to "cut costs" short term, but will lead to invisible larger costs long term.
I can see it now! Mondays and Wednesdays David will be Deputy Prime Minister. Then from Wednesday onwards, including weekends and public holidays where required, it will be Winnie.
David will be responsible for the morning office coffee runs while Winnie will be responsible for work social events like Christmas and end if FY parties.
David will be responsible for keeping the stationary cupboard stocked while Winnie will be responsible for keeping the kitchen clean.
How about they remove the excise taxes - that would actually be more a liberal/neo-liberal approach.
But... money, money, money to pay for their income tax cuts.
Smokers still seen as the pot of gold that they are.
Pretty stink way to treat addiction.
At least the amendments tried to reduce the strength of those addictions (i.e., a gradual wean off nicotine in the individual's system). Expect an excise tax on vapes very shortly too. This government isn't about healthier alternatives - and will need lots more "alternative taxes"..
In the absense of PDK I'll play the realist here.
It's fairly well summed up in one graph.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?end=2022&start=1961&view=chart
New Zealand will need to answer some hard questions about governance and living standards in the next few decades.
These BAU clowns have no idea, just like the last lot and presumably, the next lot.
Looks like Luxo has pi**sed off the real estate crew...they didn't donate millions for this outcome.
Gonna be awkward at Bayleys when Paula Bennet is pouring the sauv at friday drinks:
https://www.oneroof.co.nz/news/real-estate-agents-criticise-luxons-fore…
Real estate agents criticise Luxon's foreign buyer U-turn: 'We've blown it'
Graham Wall, of Wall Real Estate, which deals mostly in $10m-plus sales, said: "If we don't want New Zealand to be part of the real world, we've chosen the right prime minister. I can't believe a man with 38% of the vote can be such an inept negotiator.
Good riddance to the foreign buyer policy,my vote for WP wasn't wasted:
https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/melbourne-vic/nuts-chinese-…
“They are coming in busloads.”
That’s the description of one frustrated local advocate who say Chinese buyers are snapping up multimillion-dollar luxury properties in Melbourne’s most elite suburbs and pricing locals out of the market.
In Toorak, 100 per cent of sales made by a major agent in the last six months have been to Chinese buyers.
Some are even paying for the properties in cash to secure them.
David Morrell, director of Morrell and Koren, described the situation to news.com.au as “nuts”.
“We are seeing jumps of $2-3 million dollars on properties,” he said.
“We have a market place that is disproportionately being sold to Chinese buyers, relative to the rest of the population.”
Said it before, but not confident that we're keeping out foreign buyers as much as we'd like. Singapore (a known haven for offshore money) and Australia have FTA in place which for some reason are not covered by the ban, meanwhile there are plenty of connections via permanent residents and new citizens where informal links can funnel money in anyway.
"If we don't want New Zealand to be part of the real world, we've chosen the right prime minister. I can't believe a man with 38% of the vote can be such an inept negotiator."
Those who have the funds to pay $10m+ for a home don't know what the real world is for most.
Big thanks to Gaurev Sharma for throwing his toys out of the cot in 2022 - sparking the by-election which saw Tama Potaka win the seat for National.
Only a year in Parliament and he is our new Minister of Conservation, Minister for Crown Māori Relations, Minister for Māori Development and Minister for Whānau Ora. Congrats Tama.
Highly capable upcoming star - hats off to Luxon for spotting the talent.
Very worth watching his maiden speech, video linked to here.
I have hope NZ is not like Australia, that most the changes suggested to Te Tiriti will not actually get passed because most kiwis would not stand for it and National wants the votes. The cynic in me thinks the song and dance that is public submission period will really just be a useful period to distract the public with a lot of drama from some horribly distasteful changes to the public service sector that occurs in the background. After all most the news outlets have already spent far more airtime on it than most other policy changes so a lot of really awful policies are not even getting a mention in the news and could be seen as brushed under the rug, nothing to see here. Because it is easy to strip the human rights and living needs of the poorest in society when you distract them with a drama that has no effective outcome on their lives either way.
The main news branches have focused more on the possibility of NZ getting a Taylor Swift concert than say stripping the living rights of NZders in this country. But then again the NZ human rights commission is so ineffective and discriminatory they do not even think discrimination by disability in education, housing, health, and access to public services is worth their time and certainly do not even bother to think disabled people exist by excluding them from all their statistics even though they number more than 25% of the population.
Pray you never have a stroke (something that is at high rates in NZ) because facial recognition technology fails at extremely high rates when you suffer from facial paralysis and literally cannot move the way the technology needs you to. But that is minor when your access to hospital is cut due to walking and cycling initiatives around hospitals.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.