Abuse in care compensation scheme announcement believed imminent
An announcement on the government's long-awaited abuse in care compensation scheme is imminent, it is understood.
The government has repeatedly promised to announce its plans for a new single redress system before this year's budget and, with less than a fortnight until Budget Day, time is running out.
The Abuse in Care Royal Commission of Inquiry found at least 200,000 people had been abused, and even more neglected, by the state and faith-based institutions since 1950.
Its final report, released last July, outlined 138 recommendations to right the wrongs of the past and to ensure the safety of every child, young person and adult in care today.
In 2021, the inquiry made 95 recommendations for establishing an independent, fair and effective redress scheme for all survivors of abuse in state and faith-based care with existing schemes to be phased out.
The then-Labour government made little progress on the recommendations before losing the 2023 election.
During November's apology to survivors, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced $32 million to support existing schemes while the coalition ironed out details of the new redress system.
"I know that financial redress is important to many of you, and no amount of money will ever make up for what you have endured, but today I want to provide you with some details around the next steps," Luxon told survivors in parliament on November 12.
"Many of you do not want to engage with it as it currently exists. Some parts of it are 20 years old and it can take up to five years for your claims to be addressed. But there are also over 3500 of you engaging with the current system. So today I am announcing the government will invest an additional $32 million to increase capacity in the current system while we work on the new redress system.
"This funding will increase resources and help ensure the system is more responsive to your needs. But I want to assure you it is our intention to have a new single redress system operating next year."
He also promised to pressure faith-based organisations to take part.
"The government has written to church leaders to let them know our expectation is that they will do the right thing and contribute to the redress process," Luxon said.
A mish-mash of compensation schemes had been run by the Ministries of Education, Health, Social Development and Oranga Tamariki, with survivors paid an average of about $18,000 for abuse inflicted while in care.
In 2022, the Ministry for Social Development began offering payments of up to $30,000 under a Rapid Payment Framework to survivors who were seriously ill, aged 70 or older, and those with the oldest claims.
Survivors of torture at Lake Alice Hospital's child and adolescent unit were an outlier to other claimants with an average payment of $68,000, then last December, the government announced a group of 77 survivors were eligible for a rapid payment of $150,000.
Details surrounding faith-based institutions were murkier, however, the Catholic Church paid an average of $30,000 (with the highest $152,000), the Anglican
Church also averaged $30,000 (with the highest $100,000) and the Salvation Army averaged $29,000 (with the highest $91,500).
The Royal Commission said payments were "too low to provide meaningful puretumu torowhānui (holistic redress)".
"Payments by state and faith-based institutions do not, in our view, amount to meaningful redress," the commissioners said.
"We have already described the considerable range in payments by state agencies - anywhere from $1000 to $90,000 in the case of the Ministry of Social Development, although the average is a modest $20,000. The Ministry of Health average is $6000, and the Ministry of Education average is $15,300. These figures are very low compared with payments by overseas schemes."
The figures fell well short of comparable schemes in Australia where survivors received an average of $84,000; Canada at $104,000; and Ireland at $98,000 (all in New Zealand dollars).
Since 2017, Australian survivors who had sought justice through the courts had received hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars in compensation.
Survivors were anticipating meaningful changes to redress in New Zealand with sufficient compensation to provide for their well-being, while also ensuring faith-based institutions were held to account for the abuse they failed to prevent and often covered up.
However, the government had already promised a tight budget with new spending slashed from $2.4 billion to $1.3 billion.
"We have debt at levels not seen since the mid-1990s. We're running one of the biggest deficits in the world," Finance Minister Nicola Willis said, last week.
"That's the difference between what we're earning and what we're spending. That can't go on forever."
Whatever shape redress took it was bound to come as a disappointment for some survivors.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Media Insider: Heat on RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson and board after scathing review – who can they lure? Air NZ safety video up in the (AI) air; Stuff journalists eye strike action
Less than 24 hours later, he was releasing a scathing independent review of RNZ National, in which former news boss Richard Sutherland delivered a withering assessment of the public broadcaster's radio efforts and performance. As Media Insider revealed yesterday, Sutherland's review is a blistering attack on the culture at RNZ, where everyone - from junior producers to executives - appears to have turned their backs on the importance and potential of radio. There was a lot of 'blame shifting' and low ambition". And in perhaps the most stinging finding: 'Some people shouldn't be on air'. Thompson's entire legacy as chief executive and Jim Mather's as chairman of RNZ now rest on the next six to 12 months – and their response to the review and its recommendations. On first blush, and based solely on RNZ's somewhat defensive, initial public response yesterday, Thompson and his executive team might well struggle to overcome a long-term downward trend in radio listeners. Essentially, the official RNZ responses came down to – my words and analysis – 'We're already doing that'; 'We don't agree'; or 'That's something for the new (yet-to-be-appointed) chief audio officer'. One hopes that behind those PR statements, there's a lot more urgency and laser-like focus on the changes required. Based on Sutherland's findings, RNZ National essentially needs a culture change and on-air overhaul. Certainly, the comments Thompson reportedly made to staff yesterday - RNZ released the report to the NZ Herald under the Official Information Act and briefed staff around the same time - were more pointed: 'We now need to take a different approach.' 'Nothing is out of bounds' In commissioning Sutherland, Thompson requested a 'frank' report. 'Nothing is out of bounds in terms of what you consider and recommend,' Thompson wrote to Sutherland on May 31, according to documents released to the Herald under the Official Information Act yesterday. 'We will be undertaking a major reset of the station and our approach to live audio; I am seeking your independent, frank guidance on how best to do this.' RNZ National is in the spotlight following a report by former news boss Richard Sutherland. Photo / Mark Mitchell Sutherland, whose review cost RNZ $30,000, was certainly up to the mission. Like any good journalist, he did not mince words - the ferocity of his report certainly caught the attention of the industry, observers and RNZ listeners, judging by the feedback in my inbox. Sutherland spoke to more than 50 staff in what were described as 'confidential conversations'. His interviews revealed 'blame-shifting, low ambition and a belief that radio is in terminal decline'. He reported that only a couple of staff had articulated a straightforward vision of the existing and potential RNZ National audience. No notes of the interviews were taken 'by design, to encourage candour', and yet there were some common themes, reported in direct quotes in his review: 'It's someone else's fault, my programme is fine.' 'We're trying to appeal to everyone and end up appealing to no one.' 'The station sounds boring.' 'If you focus on something (ie, digital) you're turning your back on something else.' That last point is particularly pointed. In its successful and creditworthy pursuit of digital growth – and we're talking here specifically about the RNZ website (more so than digital audio) – one can mount an easy argument that RNZ has let its radio listenership slide. Sutherland says the most worrying theme in his review 'was the view that RNZ regards live listening as a sunset activity, rather than a growth opportunity'. 'Disturbingly, this belief was held by staff at every level of RNZ, from junior producers through to executives. It shows a lack of understanding of how the performance of RNZ as a whole is measured by the board, external competitors and other commentators, politicians from across the spectrum and most importantly of all for a public media entity, the public itself. 'Stamping out this belief will require significant involvement from the board, the chief executive and the executive team.' CEO's future Thompson has been with RNZ for more than 10 years. He has done a credible job in building an executive team with successful media backgrounds, particularly in publishing. Chief news officer Mark Stevens, a former Stuff editor in chief, is a digital news genius who has built a formidable newsroom - including many senior journalists he's poached from Stuff - and website audience. RNZ currently has nine executives. Photo / RNZ But Stevens does not have any radio experience. In fact, there is relatively little audio experience at the top table and anyone vying for the newly created chief audio officer role - one of Sutherland's key recommendations that is already under way - will want assurances that they have Thompson, the executive team and the board fully behind them. RNZ chairman Jim Mather (left) and chief executive Paul Thompson at Parliament's social services and community select committee. On the board itself, respected former commercial radio boss Brent Impey, who was appointed as a director last September, will be a critical figure in helping support the chief audio officer in leading a refreshed radio and digital audio strategy. Consider the task before that executive. Sutherland's major recommendations, such as the need for new talent and a review of on-air voices, have all been handed to that person, according to RNZ's responses yesterday. Sutherland said time slots should be refreshed where presenters don't align with the needs and preferences of the target audience. RNZ's response to this was: 'This will be an operational decision for the chief audio officer with appropriate processes followed.' RNZ wouldn't commit to even a marquee hire, as Sutherland recommended. 'This will be an operational decision for the chief audio officer. Changes should be made according to the needs of our audience,' said RNZ. RNZ also batted away a firm recommendation from Sutherland that the flagship Morning Report programme should be fully relocated from Wellington to Auckland, to better connect with, and build, audiences. RNZ's careful response: 'Morning Report will have a more Auckland-focused team and include more Auckland-based kaimahi (staff). However, there is still a need for resource outside of Auckland, including, importantly, for resilience." Morning Report hosts Corin Dann and Ingrid Hipkiss. Photos / RNZ And in response to another recommendation from Sutherland that the office must be reinstated as the default working environment for all presenters and production staff, RNZ stated this was already the case. Staff, it said, 'must be in the office for at least three days a week'. Audience targets Sutherland recommends, as well, a blunt audience target – 50 to 69-year-olds. That's a somewhat risky proposition, say radio industry experts - by targeting that age group, you'll inevitably attract a strong cohort of even older people. They're still vitally important, but RNZ might actually have more success if it targeted the 40-59 age group, said one source. There's a rich vein of potential audience there and it would raise the stakes, considerably, in the ratings battle against runaway commercial leader Newstalk ZB. RNZ will know where its latest ratings are at next Thursday, with the public release of the data likely a few days later. These ratings won't take into account recent tweaks to RNZ National's line-up, but they will reveal whether RNZ's downward ratings trend has been halted. Sutherland is very stark in his report. 'From 2021 to 2025, the station lost [cumulative audience] at an annual rate of more than six per cent. At this rate, by 2030, the cume will have dropped below 340,000.' Who can save RNZ's ratings? Given some of our top broadcasters are likely tied up in long-term contracts – for example, Newstalk ZB's Mike Hosking, Heather du Plessis-Allan and Ryan Bridge – RNZ has a mammoth job in luring a marquee talent, as Sutherland has recommended. Q&A host and Newstalk ZB host Jack Tame. Photo / Jason Oxenham TVNZ's Q+A host Jack Tame should be at or near the top of a hit list, in my opinion. He has consistently proven to be the best current affairs interviewer on television. Similarly, however, his contract term with Newstalk ZB, where he hosts Saturday Mornings, may be too lengthy to allow RNZ to poach him any time soon. And ZB will possibly now try to lock him in for even longer. Journalist Paddy Gower. Photo / Dean Purcell. RNZ would possibly have more hope in luring Paddy Gower – he filled in on Morning Report with Alexa Cook for two weeks last summer, and he's also filled in for Kathryn Ryan on Nine to Noon. He'd be expensive, but he'd draw a new audience. Former Newshubers Rebecca Wright and Tova O'Brien are two other top broadcasters, with journalistic skills to boot. They could well be strong candidates, although O'Brien might still be feeling burnt by the sudden closure in 2023 of Today FM, where she was breakfast host and had little time to make any inroads. Former Newshub and Today FM broadcaster Tova O'Brien. Internally at RNZ, Nights host Emile Donovan is a rising star. But is it too early to move him into a primetime spot? Same goes for Cook. Alternatively, could Kim Hill be lured back to the microphone? RNZ could really shake things up by luring Duncan Garner. It won't happen, but it really would show that RNZ was up for change. One Good Poll Air NZ safety video up in the (AI) air Air New Zealand's latest safety video is still up in the air, with the airline and its creative agency still working on a concept - while also considering an artificial intelligence (AI) element. Air New Zealand revealed its 23rd safety video last year, this one starring Steven Adams. Photo / Supplied It appears there have been delays, with sources saying they had expected the video to be in production by now. Creative discussions over the safety video are understood to be continuing. Creative agency Bastion Shine was decidedly hush-hush yesterday. Asked specifically about AI considerations, Bastion Shine's Luke Farmer said: 'There's no comment on that. I can't say anything on this at all.' Asked if the video was still planned for production this year, he said: 'No comment on that. It's all under wraps – so no comment.' Production industry sources say the airline and creative agency have been considering AI elements, with some experienced production industry staff fearing their jobs are at risk. For many years, Auckland-based Reel Factory has helped produce the videos; executive producer Dan Watkins would also not comment yesterday. Air NZ said in a statement that it hadn't yet confirmed which local production company would come on board for the latest video. It is understood the airline expects the video to be produced later this year, at around the same cost as previous projects. 'As with many of our previous safety videos, creative development, production, and the shoot will take place right here in Aotearoa with local suppliers, showcasing the incredible local talent we have on our doorstep,' said Air New Zealand global brand general manager Grace Blewitt. 'We're excited to have the Bastion Shine team on board to develop the creative concept. Right now, we're in the creative ideation phase, exploring a range of approaches and possibilities. 'The heart of our safety videos remains the same – they are proudly human-led, from ideation to execution, with our world-class cabin crew and talented supporting cast front and centre. 'Through our partnership with OpenAI, we're looking at the potential to use Sora (OpenAI's text-to-video model) in this project to explore new and innovative ways of working. 'That could mean creating different versions of the video tailored to specific audiences or aircraft, or introducing efficiencies to areas where we've previously used technology such as digital edits and CGI.' It is understood that Air NZ sees AI giving it some process improvements in areas such as post-production and digital effects. Stuff journos vote on strike action Stuff journalists are voting on whether they should take strike action over a stand-off in their collective contract negotiations. Media Insider understands the results of a ballot are due later today and that, so far, the vote is overwhelmingly in favour of a strike if matters are not resolved. More than 140 Stuff journalists are represented by the E tū union. One source outlined what they believed was a 'hardline' attempt by the company to split the collective contract into separate agreements (Masthead Publishing and Stuff Digital). Stuff Digital operates and Masthead Publishing looks after the company's digital subscription websites and newspapers. The source said Stuff's 'very aggressive industrial relations approach' was about 'weakening the hand' of journalists and contrasted with owner and chief executive Sinead Boucher's earlier comments. Stuff owner and chief executive Sinead Boucher. Photos/ Dean Purcell, supplied 'It is effectively entirely at odds with the assurances that were provided by Sinead Boucher at the time of the structural separation at the beginning of this year.' Staff were basically told at that time, said the source, 'look, don't worry, nothing's going to change'. A Stuff spokesperson said in a statement: 'There are a range of claims on the table in our negotiations with E tū. In keeping with our good faith and confidentiality commitments, we will not be commenting further.' Emails obtained by Media Insider in early July revealed that Stuff's unionised journalists were perturbed by the company's position on several fronts. They described 'highlights and lowlights' following a bargaining meeting with the company at the time, saying the company was 'holding a pay offer hostage' and 'Stuff wants to axe our health insurance'. 'As you know, we've asked for an overall pay increase of 6.5%, including a reform of the pay scale to be more aligned with how RNZ calculates things,' said one email sent by a Stuff journalist delegate, and co-signed alongside 10 others, to union members. 'It aims the largest % increases at our intermediate journalists. We want them to see journalism and Stuff as a viable career path.' The Great NZ Road Trip is here again! I'm on the road again – from coast to hinterland – in our latest editorial series to gauge the mood of the nation and celebrate the very best of New Zealand. As we head into spring, it's time to reset and uncover some of New Zealand's best stories on the third annual Great New Zealand Road Trip. This year, with the support of sponsor Night 'n Day, we will be meeting notable and everyday Kiwis helping make a difference in their towns, regions, country, and the world. Or there might be a strong story in the plight of your town and community. The Great NZ Road Trip starts this Sunday - I'll be making my way from Otago and Southland to Northland over the next two weeks. Know a great character, business, project or story? I'd love to hear about it. Please email me at roadtrip@ Digital news sunrise in Fiji One of the Pacific Islands' best-known mastheads, the Fiji Sun, has undergone an editorial and digital transformation. It has unveiled a new-look website - and undertaken a digital-first newsroom transformation - as part of a project involving two Australasian agencies: Daylight in New Zealand and Bastion Digital in Australia. The new-look Fiji Sun website. According to a statement, 'Bastion Digital led the business transformation and editorial strategy, guiding the Fiji Sun through modern newsroom practices and delivering intensive training... 'Daylight... led the development of the new publishing platform, one that puts powerful storytelling, audience experience, and modern monetisation tools at the core.' Fiji Sun acting publisher and chief executive Rosi Doviverata said the changes were a 'landmark moment' in an environment 'where independent media plays a critical role and press freedoms continue to evolve'. The new-look website features news updates, sports results, and a dedicated Fijian-language section. The transformation also unlocked new commercial opportunities, according to the statement: dynamic advertising models, sponsored content, bundled print and digital offerings, newsletters, podcasts, and video journalism. Future phases would see the introduction of subscription models and first-party audience data strategies. 'For 25 years, the Fiji Sun has been a cornerstone of Fijian journalism,' said Daylight chief executive Lee Lowndes. 'This new platform propels them from a basic digital footprint to a premium, agile, and scalable news service.' Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie is one of New Zealand's most experienced senior journalists and media leaders. He has held executive and senior editorial roles at NZME including Managing Editor, NZ Herald Editor and Herald on Sunday Editor and has a small shareholding in NZME. Watch Media Insider – The Podcast on YouTube, or listen to it on iHeartRadio, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: If we want to limit words in te reo Māori, what about words in English?
Surely every parent wants to hear their child's teacher say, 'He tohunga tō tamaiti ki te pānui' ('Your child is great at reading'), and for the parent to respond 'Ehara, ehara' ('Absolutely'). Sue Leman, Mt Albert. The children can cope It is astonishing to note so much alarm over the inclusion of Māori words in the reading programme for 5-year-olds. Surely teachers and children can both cope with the inclusion of vocabulary that many learners would already be familiar with. Songs in Māori, counting and skipping rhymes are known and often sung in kindergarten and pre-school situations. Most young children entering school would happily cope with 'pukeko' or 'pipi' as part of daily life and vocabulary. Growing up in New Zealand, they are also used to Aotearoa as the name of our motu. We have a hybrid language already; it's not easy or desirable to separate English and Māori usage. As a writer for Red Rocket Books, used as supplementary readers in junior classes, I am delighted to find some of my early titles being produced in Māori. Why would we want to backtrack on the language progress that has already been made? Would the education authorities please reconsider this restrictive attitude towards early school learning? Diana Burslem, Epsom. Blood-and-guts debate Gerry Brownlee has done it again! Add this latest fiasco in the debating chamber to his long list of 'Gerry Brownlee Gaffes' - and yes, there is a page with a list of at least 10 major gaffes on it. Brownlee defended his actions by saying Chlöe Swarbrick's words were directed personally at other coalition MPs. Oh no! That being the case then, why was Labour's Kieran McNulty not sent from the House in July last year when he said, 'They are spineless and gutless because they have given in to the whims of their coalition partners just to get into power', when referring to National. He went on to say, 'Utterly spineless and gutless.' There are many other examples of references to spines and guts being used, even by Sir John Key, which Brownlee enthusiastically applauded at the time. If anyone should be asked to apologise for their hasty actions, it's Brownlee. But I'm guessing he will be too gutless, or should that be spineless? Steve Jardine, Glendowie. Add to that list . . . Chlöe Swarbrick, the co-leader of the Green Party, was asked to leave the House yesterday for the second time after calling MPs spineless, or questioning whether enough of them had spines, and refusing to apologise. I support the cause Chlöe was espousing, in its essence, and also her right to make that comment in the House without being asked to leave. However, I wonder if she will now add to her list of spineless MPs two former Prime Ministers, (Jacinda Ardern and Chris Hipkins) and two former ministers (Grant Robertson and Ayesha Verrall), who have all chosen not to appear in public hearings for the Covid Royal Commission of Inquiry, despite being asked to do so, as announced on Wednesday. Claire Chambers, Parnell. In support of Peters' approach It would seem that Hamas has now come out and thanked all of those nations that, in recent weeks, called for the recognition of a Palestinian state. Hamas claims that this was its ultimate aim and that it is grateful for the international support. That would underscore why Chlöe Swarbrick's call for support from 'six of 68 government MPs with a spine' was, in fact, way off course, and that Winston Peters' more cautious approach makes total sense. John Pendreigh, Westmere. Good on Chlöe! What Chlöe Swarbrick said in the House, and to reporters afterwards, was right on the money, and she should not have been told to withdraw her statement and apologise. Good on her for not doing so. Glenn Forsyth, Taupō.
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Only one option on recognising Palestinian state
Recognising a supposed state which is split in two, with one bit run by the corrupt Fatah movement and the other by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hamas, surely meets those tests. Yet Peters going so public on the matter on Monday was still extraordinary. In a formal media statement, the Foreign Minister publicly acknowledged the Cabinet is divided over whether to recognise Palestine, with 'a broad range of strongly held views within our Government, Parliament and indeed New Zealand society'. 'This is not a straightforward, clear-cut issue,' Peters said, in what risks reading as a subtle dig at Luxon. Peters promised to approach the matter 'calmly, cautiously and judiciously' and to 'canvass this broad range of views before taking a proposal to Cabinet' which he would then present in New York late next month, when representing New Zealand at the UN's annual leaders' week. While Peters would be right to worry about US President Donald Trump's reaction to New Zealand recognising Palestine in an age of arbitrary tariffs, it is almost unthinkable that Cabinet would decide against it. Recognition of a Palestinian state is common ground between the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition, representing over two-thirds of MPs in Parliament, and of at least two of the smaller parties. It is also now the position of our only military ally and biggest economic partner, Australia, and the conditional stance of two other close Five Eyes friends, the UK and Canada. Strong objections can be made that the divided Palestinian Authority currently fails to meet the usual tests of statehood, including control of territory and effective government. Moreover, recognising Palestine as a state risks being seen not just as endorsing the corrupt West Bank regime of Fatah President Mahmoud Abbas – now into the 20th year of his first four-year term – but the evil Hamas organisation which has run Gaza for nearly as long. On the other hand, that may be too purist. Recognising Palestinian statehood is not about supporting Abbas or Hamas but a way of expressing opposition, not to Israel itself, but to its Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. It isn't clear if Luxon meant his attack on Netanyahu this week – that he has 'gone way too far' and 'lost the plot' – to be so unequivocal that it attracted global media attention and was flattered by a tough response from Israel. 'When you don't really need an army because your most deadly enemy is a possum or a cat,' its deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel said tartly but not inaccurately, 'you wouldn't comprehend the challenges that come with facing Hamas – a jihadist death cult – only a few kilometres away from your country, that rape, execute, burn alive and starve your people.' Nevertheless, Luxon almost certainly spoke for a majority of the Cabinet, Parliament and New Zealanders. The only inaccurate part about his critique of Netanyahu is that he described his going too far and losing the plot as a recent development. In fact, Netanyahu – who has been on trial for corruption and fraud in the Jerusalem District Court since 2020 – has tragically been coming to mirror his enemies for much longer. Israel and the world would be better off had he retired from politics after he implemented his extraordinarily successful economic reforms 20 years ago. He has managed even to alienate Germany, whose leaders have described one of the purposes of the very existence of their country since 1949 as being to assure the security of Israel. Even it has felt forced to suspend all military exports to Israel that could be used in Gaza. With Luxon having made his attitude so clear – not just to New Zealanders but to the international community – Cabinet cannot choose other than to endorse his support for New Zealand recognising Palestinian statehood. No matter how frustrating it can sometimes be for foreign ministers, foreign policy is ultimately the prerogative of the head of government. If, somehow, Luxon's views were not to prevail on such a matter, he would be rendered a complete lame duck around his own Cabinet table. Moreover, rightly or wrongly, actively deciding not to recognise Palestine in the current international environment would no longer be interpreted as a refusal to do anything that would legitimise Hamas but as an active endorsement of Netanyahu and some of the extremist parties that keep him in office and so potentially out of jail. New Zealand foreign and trade policy is strongest and most successful when it reflects a consensus between National and Labour. For all their faults, they are ultimately the grown-ups in the room. The antics of Green co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick or the more reflexively pro-Israel views of some within the Act Party should not influence the forthcoming decision. The Cabinet Manual demands that matters such as this be considered at that level, and not just resolved in a meeting between the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition and Foreign Minister. So be it. Cabinet government is a better system than taking decisions on a Prime Minister's couch. Still, with New Zealand's unfolding economic crisis needing to be tackled without distraction, it would be better if the decision could be taken more quickly than late September. And it should be the Prime Minister who makes the announcement in New Zealand and explains why the decision was made, not the Foreign Minister at the UN in New York. As leader of the country, not just a mere first among equals around the Cabinet table, Luxon needs to assert himself.
