Watch live: Christopher Luxon on what Budget 2025 means
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will provide fresh insights into last week's Budget, when he speaks to a business audience at the ANZ Breakfast event in Wellington.
Luxon will on Wednesday share what he sees as the Budget's key initiatives and the government's policy priorities.
He is being joined at the forum by ANZ NZ chief executive Antonia Watson and ANZ NZ's chief economist Sharon Zollner.
Watch the livestream and follow RNZ's live updates at the top of this page.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Why Is The New Zealand Media Not Questioning The Implications Of The Gene Technology Bill?
Press Release – Lisa Er Despite the profound ethical, environmental, and societal implications, there has been a noticeable lack of critical scrutiny from the mainstream media, says Lisa Er. As the Gene Technology Bill advances through Parliament, New Zealand faces a pivotal moment in science, agriculture, and public health. The proposed legislation would significantly relax restrictions on gene technology, enabling broader research, development, and use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in New Zealand for the first time in nearly 30 years Yet, despite the profound ethical, environmental, and societal implications, there has been a noticeable lack of critical scrutiny from the mainstream media. 'It is plausible that political and economic factors are influencing the nature and depth of media coverage regarding the Gene Technology Bill,' says Lisa Er, author of a petition to 'halt the progress of the Gene Technology Bill and instead set up a Commission of Inquiry into the health and safety of people and the environment on behalf of citizens, to allow time for wider community and stakeholder consultation.' Key Concerns: Environmental Risks: The Bill paves the way for the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into New Zealand's unique ecosystems, risking irreversible impacts on native species, biodiversity, crops, and the country's global clean, green brand. Lack of Public Consultation: The Government has failed to meaningfully consult with Māori, scientists, and the wider public, ignoring Treaty of Waitangi obligations and indigenous rights, community concerns about food safety, cultural values, and environmental protection. Threat to Export Markets: New Zealand's primary export markets, especially in Europe and Asia, have strict GM-free requirements. The Bill endangers market access and could jeopardize billions in export earnings. Undermining Precaution: The Bill abandons the precautionary principle that has underpinned New Zealand's cautious approach to gene technology, exposing the country to unknown long-term risks. Ignoring International Best Practice: Leading nations are strengthening, not weakening, their oversight of gene technologies in response to new scientific evidence and public concern. Insufficient Public Debate: The bill has generated over 1,500 public submissions, reflecting deep divisions and strong opinions across the country. The removal of labelling GE is of considerable public concern. Why has the minimal media coverage largely focused on official statements and the potential benefits, with little attention paid to the risks, opposition viewpoints, or the broader societal debate that is unfolding in submissions and community discussions? Risk Oversight and Regulatory Gaps: the bill will open the door to unintended consequences, including ecosystem disruption, cross-contamination of crops, and unclear long-term health effects Transparency and Accountability: Some have questioned whether the bill is being rushed or if consultation has been adequate, particularly given the timing of the public submission period over the summer holidays Media outlets have an essential role in holding lawmakers accountable and ensuring transparency in the legislative process, and these risks deserve deeper journalistic investigation and public explanation. A Call to Action for the Media: We urge New Zealand's journalists and editors to fulfil their democratic duty by: – Investigating the full range of concerns about the Gene Technology Bill, including those raised in public submissions. – Highlighting the ethical, cultural, and environmental questions that remain unresolved. – Providing balanced, evidence-based coverage that empowers New Zealanders to make informed decisions about the future of gene technology in their country. 'The Gene Technology Bill represents a generational shift in New Zealand's approach to biotechnology', says Er. 'The public deserves robust, critical journalism that examines not only the promises but also the very real perils of this legislation.' Lisa Er, founder of Lisa's Hummus Issued in the public interest to encourage transparent, balanced, and investigative reporting on a matter of national importance Petition with over 4,000 signatures Petition request: That the House of Representatives halt the progress of the Gene Technology Bill and instead set up a Commission of Inquiry into the health and safety of people and the environment on behalf of citizens, to allow time for wider community and stakeholder consultation. Petition reason: I consider the Gene Technology Bill has failed to follow sound and fair processes by not consulting enough with the public and other stakeholders. I believe there is inadequate consideration of Te Tiriti obligations, and insufficient requirements to protect people and the environment from the risks of GE contamination. A range of gene editing techniques would be excluded from regulation. This would mean GE products would enter the environment and food supply untested, unregistered and unlabeled.
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Porirua Residents To Decide On Super-Council, Pacific Leaders Urge Protection Of Local Representation
Article – Mary Afemata – Local Democracy Reporter Porirua Mayor Anita Baker says the timing is right for this issue to be brought to voters, adding that the last formal proposal for amalgamation was in 2013 and that the local government landscape has changed significantly since then. Porirua voters can express their opinion on the potential creation of a Wellington-wide super-council. But Pacific leaders have voiced concerns that the model could dilute local representation unless equity and cultural voices are prioritised. In this year's local elections, Porirua residents will be able to participate in a non-binding referendum that asks whether the city should investigate amalgamating with Wellington, the Hutt Valley, and the Wellington Regional Council into a single entity, while retaining local decision-making. Porirua Mayor Anita Baker says the timing is right for this issue to be brought to voters, adding that the last formal proposal for amalgamation was in 2013 and that the local government landscape has changed significantly since then. Pacific leaders are worried that the move could weaken representation, especially if equity is not prioritised and voter turnout remains low. Councillor Izzy Ford, one of only three Pacific representatives on the Porirua Council, supports the initiative but emphasises the need to respond to community feedback to maintain trust, even though the referendum is non-binding. According to the council's official report, voter turnout in areas of Wellington City, including Mount Cook East, dropped below 30 per cent in 2022. In Porirua, turnout was slightly higher at 37 per cent. Ford hopes the referendum will provide clear guidance, but she stresses the importance of the council committing to listening to the community. Representation remains a major concern for Ford. She questioned how the council would ensure that all voices in Porirua, particularly those from underrepresented communities, are heard in this process. Ford hopes the referendum will lead to a definitive direction from the people of Porirua. 'If they give us a total yes and we don't act on it, then that's going to build more mistrust,' she says. 'There's always that concern, because our people don't always turn out to vote. 'That's a glaring concern, is the underrepresentation of Pasifika around the table.' Engagement with Pasifika communities is important, according to Ford. 'Having things translated into Pasifika languages, so that it's a bit easier for people to digest, and going into spaces like the churches, where a lot of our Pacific people are, and then it's non-threatening sort of spaces as well, and using our common faces in those common spaces, so that people can see them as non-threatening.' Gabriel Tupou, Councillor for Hutt City, is concerned that the amalgamation could reduce Pacific representation. As the only Pasifika councillor in the Hutt Valley, Tupou says the issue must be openly discussed with communities. 'In a super-city model, we risk less representation. Currently, we have 12 city councillors and the mayor. That will be greatly reduced. 'With the large Pasifika demographic we have, they must have input, just like every other community.' Tupou also raised concerns about the referendum regarding Māori ward running alongside the amalgamation question. Tupou highlighted that Hutt City Mayor Campbell Barry plans to present a similar referendum proposal next month. 'I think it's important to keep the Māori ward question clean and on its own.' Tupou says that from a Pasifika perspective, the challenges of running for election are already significant, as candidates need to have broad appeal. He is also cautious about the financial implications. 'We're looking at possibly a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars to carry out the amalgamation. 'South Auckland enjoys a larger Pasifika community, and they're able to mobilise their voice and voting power to elect Pasifika councillors,' Tupou says. 'But we don't have those same concentrations here.' Auimatagai Ken Ah Kuoi, community leader and Kilbirnie-based lawyer, warns that centralising governance could reduce the influence of smaller communities like Porirua, which has a large Pacific population. He says regional solutions may overlook local contexts, adding that a unified council model could offer benefits, but emphasises the need for safeguards. 'There's a risk Pacific voices could be diluted in a larger, more bureaucratic system,' he says. 'What works for Wellington might not suit Porirua or Wainuiomata. Pacific communities often have specific cultural needs that may get overlooked. 'A unified council model could benefit Pacific people by improving access to resources and regional influence. But it also carries risks – disconnection, loss of local control, and inequity if not managed carefully. 'To ensure Pacific communities benefit, any move toward amalgamation would need guaranteed local representation, strong community consultation, cultural competency across the new structure, and equity-focused service delivery.' Petone Community Board member Semi Kuresa says fair representation must be a non-negotiable starting point. Kuresa says while Pasifika make up more than nine per cent of Wellington's population, their enrolment and eligibility rates are much lower. He highlighted three key concerns: representation, cost, and the geographic boundaries of a new council. 'While amalgamation might seem practical to some, it raises serious questions about representation, particularly for Pacific communities,' he says. 'The contribution of our Pacific community isn't something that should be reduced to slogans or soundbites. A strong Pacific voice at the table matters. 'As someone intending to stand for Hutt City Council, I'm focused on ensuring communities too often overlooked are part of every stage of decision-making. We can't afford to dilute the voices we need to hear more of.' Voting for the 2025 local elections in Porirua, Wellington, and the Hutt Valley will take place from 9 September to 11 October. Each council will have its own ballot papers. Porirua will include a non-binding referendum on amalgamation and a binding vote on whether to retain the city's Māori ward.
1News
an hour ago
- 1News
Environmentalists see forestry changes as dangerous step for Tairāwhiti
Tairāwhiti environmentalists have called changes for commercial forestry under proposed Resource Management Act reforms "a slap in the face" and a return to weaker forestry regulations. Local groups are preparing to make submissions on proposed changes to the way forestry is managed after consultation on the Resource Management Act opened on Thursday. The proposals would make it harder for councils to have their own discretion in setting stricter rules to control tree planting. Gisborne District Council said the proposed changes grant both "real opportunities" and "some challenges". The Eastland Wood Council is still considering its options around submitting. ADVERTISEMENT Mana Taiao Tairāwhiti (MTT), the group behind a 12,000-signature petition that triggered the Ministerial Inquiry into Land Use (MILU) in Tairāwhiti and Wairoa, claimed the Government was relaxing "already permissive forestry rules". The inquiry, published in May 2023, followed the destruction caused by Cyclone Gabrielle and other major storms, when woody debris, forestry slash and sedimentation flooded the region's land, waterways and infrastructure. At the time of the inquiry's findings, the previous Government announced actions to reduce the risk of a Gabrielle repeat. MTT spokeswoman and Ruatōria resident Tui Warmenhoven said, "We were promised stronger protections – what we're getting is deregulation dressed as reform". The proposed changes were "a slap in the face to the hundreds of whānau who've already paid the price for poor forestry regulations," said Warmenhoven in a group statement. Another part of the proposed changes will require a Slash Mobilisation Risk Assessment as part of all harvest management plans. It would also consider refining requirements to remove all slash above a certain size from forest cutovers. ADVERTISEMENT MTT welcomed the proposed requirement for Slash Mobilisation Risk Assessments, however, it warned "this would be ineffective without enforceable planning requirements and local oversight". "A slash assessment without an afforestation plan is meaningless – it's a partial fix that ignores the root of the problem," said Warmenhoven. "We've already seen what happens when forestry is left to regulate itself and the problems with planting shallow-rooting pine on erosion-prone slopes. We are also concerned about the removal of references to woody debris, given that whole pine plantations collapsed during Cyclone Gabrielle and still line many waterways in the region." Last September, Eastland Wood Council chairman Julian Kohn said forestry firms were "bleeding money," with many companies finding Gisborne too costly to invest in. Speaking with Local Democracy Reporting, Kohn said Eastland Wood Council was still considering whether to submit its own response or work with other council members to make submissions. "We've been working closely with the minister and advocating for what we see needs to be real change in respect of some of the causes in the NES-CF [National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry]," said Kohn. "Our real concern is that the way the council is treating many of these consents and these enforcement orders are literally sending these forest companies to the wall." ADVERTISEMENT He said forestry companies would close if things continued the way they were, which would leave forests unmanaged and unharvested. "Next time we have a rain event, then some of those trees which have been locked up are going to come down the waterways, which is exactly what everybody wants to try to prevent." Gisborne District Councils director of sustainable futures, Jocelyne Allen, said the consultation documents came "as no surprise" as they were broad and aligned with what the council had seen in the Cabinet paper and Expert Advisory Group report. "The packages cover infrastructure, the primary sector, freshwater, and urban growth, all areas that matter deeply to our region. "There are real opportunities here, but also some challenges, and we're taking the time to work through both carefully," Allen said. The council intends to submit a response and will be taking a strategic and collaborative approach to doing so, including engaging with tangata whenua, whānau, hapū and iwi across the region and working through its sector networks, particularly the Local Government Special Interest Groups and Te Uru Kahika, said Allen. Before the announcement of the proposed changes, in an email to Local Democracy Reporting on Monday, Primary Industries and Forestry Minister Todd McClay said forestry played an important role in the economy and provided many jobs on the East Coast. ADVERTISEMENT "The Government is working closely with the Gisborne District Council and respected members of the forestry industry, farming and iwi to manage and reduce risk through better and more practical rules rather than blanket restrictions or bans." He said they are reviewing slash management practices and will amend the NES-CF so councils can focus on the most at-risk areas, lower costs and deliver better social and environmental outcomes. "We want them to focus on high-risk areas, which is what Gisborne District Council is currently doing, rather than suggesting that there should no longer be any forestry in the Tairāwhiti region," he said. LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
