While Ministers are being grilled on Budget spending by MPs from across the House during Scrutiny week, an investigation has been launched to scrutinise major failings at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment over what the Immigration Minister described as a "trifecta of terrible things" in the public service.
Here's what's happening in Parliament this week:
Government accepts Infrastructure Commission's recommendations
The Government is reviewing the land transport funding system after the Infrastructure raised concerns for the need "to ensure financial sustainability and enhance economic and social outcomes".
New Zealand’s first national infrastructure plan was released earlier this year, showing a widening gap between what the country wants to build, what it’s getting and what it can actually pay for.
In releasing the Government's formal response, Transport Minister Chris Bishop said 11 of the 16 recommendations from the Infrastructure Commission were already underway, and overall all were supported - three in principle, with further work to be done.
The Commission recommended reforming the land transport funding system as part of that, Bishop saying they agreed with the problems identified by the Commission with investment, pricing and delivery settings in land transport. They have commissioned officials to develop proposals to be publicly consulted on by June 2028.
Bishop said its release was "a sobering wake-up call for many people."
"New Zealand spends a lot on infrastructure, around 5.8 per cent of GDP annually over the last 20 years, one of the highest in the OECD, yet we rank towards the bottom for efficiency, and fourth to last in the OECD for asset management."
Creative accounting in the public service
Investigations have been launched into integrity concerns over Immigration NZ’s failed Biometric Capability Update (BCU) project. The project in 2018 was launched without Cabinet approval, misled ministers and has needed $31 million from this year’s Budget to put an end to the project.
A report into the update, which intended to modernise its Identity Management, found the business cases was overly optimistic and insufficiently evidenced, leadership allowed significant risks to persist and Ministerial reporting was inconsistent, overly optimistic or misleading.
Immigration Minister Erica Stanford said it was “extraordinarily concerning” that people working on the project that had raised concerns were removed from the project, and the report had raised more questions than it answered.
She said it was important the Public Service Commission “get to the bottom of what was a doomed project from the start, not only in a flawed business case, and then considerable flawed scope creep… creative accounting, keeping decisions away from Cabinet, limited information being given to ministers, including misleading information, and people being let go.
“I mean, that is literally the trifecta of terrible things that you would expect from the public service, and that has to be cleaned up, so that we can have confidence moving forward.”
Stanford said the project, prior to the current Government coming in, had ballooned from $19 million to $35 million.
“We still have to get to the bottom of what are the full costs of this project, because I'm not confident that what I've been provided with is the reality.”
“I've certainly been misled, and I worked that out pretty quickly at the beginning of the project, when the report that I got said that everything was rosy, we were on track… when we scratched a bit deeper and actually asked for that internal quality assurance to ascertain what it actually said, what I was told was pure fiction.”
Public Service Commissioner Brian Roche said integrity matters in the report were serious, concerning and went to “the core of the behaviours and ethics required of public servants, and the ability of Ministers to have confidence in the advice they receive from officials”.
Maternity scans
Labour is adding to its policy list by promising free maternity scans, saying it will pay the fee, which is usually between $30 to $90, costed by the party at $29 million a year and paid for through its promised Capital Gains Tax.
Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said women and their families “shouldn't have to worry about money when it comes to making sure they and their babies are okay”.
“No one should have to skip a scan because they can’t afford it. Scans pick up issues early, help families prepare for birth, and save lives.”
ACT Leader David Seymour was quick to hit out at Hipkins, accusing him of “building up false hope by promising people things that they can’t afford, the most cynical type of politics.”
“Chris Hipkins has promised free doctor’s visits, cheaper public transport and now free maternity scans. He can’t seriously pay for any of this when in the same breath he says he wants to reverse ACT’s savings, whether it’s the $10.9 billion for pay equity, the $2.7 billion from public sector savings, or $427 million from school lunches."
Opportunity Party on MP's expenses
The Opportunity Party is taking a swing at MP expenses, leader Qiulae Wong promising, should her party enter Parliament, MPs would not use allowances to build private wealth.
“In effect, this policy will ensure that Opportunity MPs living outside of Wellington will rent accommodation while serving in the capital. Because it’s not fair that taxpayer dollars pay their mortgage and build their wealth, Wong said.
“Similarly, when an Opportunity MP needs to rent office space in their electorate, the policy will ensure that taxpayer dollars do not go towards building property wealth for the MP, the party or donors.”
On Monday, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced he asked officials to look into the perks of ex-MPs and former PMs following controversy over spending.
The Spinoff reported this month almost $300,000 is spent a year for mostly unused Crown limos for former PMs and their spouses. Meanwhile, The Press reported $6 million in travel subsidies for ex MPs prior to 1999 and their spouses has been spent over the last 10 years.
However, the probe would not look at current MP expenditure, despite stories of MPs claiming accommodation subsidies on homes they have owned for years and thousands spent on airport parking.
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.