Budget 2025: $4.95b for agriculture to drive growth and innovation
'That's why we're focused on unlocking new global opportunities – from the UK and EU, to the Gulf, and India – while cutting red tape so producers can get on with the job.'
To further strengthen the sector's resilience, Budget 2025 includes a new focus on driving growth and rural wellbeing through a series of targeted grassroots investments:
$246 million over four years in a new Primary Sector Growth Fund (PSGF) to help lift food and fibre sector productivity, profitability and resilience;
$2m over four years in a contestable rural wellbeing fund;
$1m extra over four years for Rural Support Trusts and other organisations to support farmers and growers;
$400,000 over four years in direct grants for New Zealand's A&P shows;
Ongoing support for catchment groups of $36m over the next four years, through the MPI;
$250,000 for the 2025-26 financial year for Rural Women New Zealand to boost its on-the-ground support for rural communities.
'These initiatives back the people behind the sector who make our rural economy tick,' McClay said.
The new Investment Boost tax incentive would improve cash flow and make on-farm and forest investments more affordable.
This allows farmers and growers to immediately deduct 20% of the cost of new machinery or farm equipment, on top of existing depreciation rates.
McClay said Budget 2025 also continued the Government's commitment to $400m over four years.
There was also an additional $23m carried over to accelerate the development and rollout of new tools and technologies to reduce emissions, without closing farms or sending jobs and production overseas – a key part of ensuring the sector was globally competitive into the future.
The Government's team of agriculture ministers - McClay, Andrew Hoggard, Mark Patterson and Nicola Grigg - said Budget 2025 was about ensuring farmers and growers had the tools and support to succeed.
'When our rural communities do well, the whole country benefits.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
875 rural students receive more than $3 million in boarding fee support from Government
The Government spent over 30% more last year than in 2023 providing financial support towards boarding fees for rural students. New Ministry of Education data show $3,242,035 was paid out for 875 students under the Access Barrier Allowance last year. That's up from $2,431,144 for 792
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Seymour on Māori funding: Need over race in Government policy shift
He went from being abused at Waitangi this year to the Bombay Hills to the opening of Tipene, St Stephen's School, a new charter school on the former site of the old St Stephen's College, which was closed in 2000. Untangling Government targeting can be confusing. Apparently funding for Māori-focused schools, be it charter or kura kaupapa, is fine. But funding for a Māori Health Authority, Te Aka Whai Ora, ended last year, and the authority was disestablished. Specific funding for Māori housing programmes was cut from Budget 2025, and funding for Māori trades training was cut. But funding for Māori wardens was increased, and continued for Whānau Ora. It is okay for Māori health providers to be contracted to increase immunisation rates for Māori babies. But when ACC tendered this year for expertise to reduce work injuries for Māori and Pacific people in the manufacturing sector, where they are over-represented, Act contacted the ACC Minister, and the Minister asked ACC to rethink. Ethnicity has been removed as one of five factors in what is called an equity adjustor for waiting lists in the health system, and a move by the last Government has been scrapped to screen Māori at a younger age for bowel cancer on the basis that they get it earlier. So when is targeting okay and not okay for Māori under Seymour's philosophical approach? Essentially, it's when all factors other than race have been ruled out. But he is defensive about the way Act has been criticised for it. 'In a lot of this debate, people assume we are opposed a group of people or a culture where in actual fact we are opposed to an arbitrary way it comes about.' When it comes to charter schools, Seymour says they present no discrimination, and that the fact that some are set up for Māori is neither an advantage or disadvantage. "There is a misconception that I and Act are opposed to anything Māori," says David Seymour. Photo / Mark Mitchell 'There is no discrimination in the policy. It says if you want to set up a school you must basically demonstrate three things: that you've got an idea, that you've got capacity to plausibly deliver on it and that you have community support. A wide range of people were doing it, including a kaupapa Māori school. 'The thing there is nothing in the policy that says you have advantage or disadvantage in being a Māori school.' The difference with the Māori Health Authority On the other hand, the Māori Health Authority had effectively said that New Zealand would have two health commissioning agencies because the most important thing about a person was their ethnicity.' 'With a charter school, by contrast, there's no putting different patients into different boxes,' said Seymour. 'People themselves can choose a school with a certain style. The difference is that charter schools are bottom-up. The Māori Health Authority was top-down.' Seymour cites the Cabinet Office Circular headed 'Needs-based service provision', which was issued to all in September last year as part of National's coalition agreements with Act and NZ First to set out its expectation that services should be delivered on the basis of need, not race. The salient parts state: 'The Government seeks to ensure that all New Zealanders, regardless of ethnicity or personal identity, have access to public services that are appropriate and effective for them, and that services are not arbitrarily allocated on the basis of ethnicity or any other aspect of identity. The circular draws on international law, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, for temporary circumstances in which affirmative action is acceptable. It quotes the convention: 'Special measures taken for the sole purpose of securing adequate advancement of certain racial or ethnic groups or individuals requiring such protection as may be necessary in order to ensure such groups or individuals equal enjoyment or exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms shall not be deemed racial discrimination, provided, however, that such measures do not, as a consequence, lead to the maintenance of separate rights for different racial groups and that they shall not be continued after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved'. The circular is essentially Government policy and sets expectations for ministers, chief executives and officials involved in service design, commissioning, and delivery of government services. Voucher system in tertiary education Seymour does not have a problem with the variety in the education system but does have a problem with any affirmative action courses that have lower standards for Māori or other groups. 'Tertiary education now, at least, is essentially a voucher system,' he said. 'You go to any registered tertiary institution and the state will fund your places. 'Do I have a problem, for example, with Te Waananga? No. If people want to go to the University of Auckland, they should. If they want to go to the Waananga, they should. Will they get different treatment at each one? Probably, but that's a pluralistic society. 'That I don't have a problem with.' But he was completely opposed to lower standards of admission for Māori to say, medical school. 'That is different access to opportunity based on your race, versus presenting and delivering the opportunity in different ways in a marketplace place and the latter I completely support, and that's what charter schools are.' He said he recently chastised a supporter of his who had complained about a netball tournament in Whanganui where you had to speak Māori for the whole tournament, and you could be penalised for speaking English. 'And I just said, 'Why is this a problem?'' It was no different to a camp for French language students where you could speak only French at the camp and there would be no problem with that. 'We have no problem with multiculturalism. It's discrimination and preferential allocation of resources that we have a problem with.' Seymour said he did not have a problem with using Māori health providers to have better access to Māori patients with defined needs. 'If you can genuinely show that ethnicity is your variable and that is better than any other way in making sure that all patients get better service, then we support that. 'But what we don't support is a framework where the starting premise of the law is that we are divided into tangata whenua and tangata Tiriti, and that is the lens through which we must always look. That I think is wrong. 'There is a misconception that I and Act are somehow opposed to anything Māori. We are really not.' Changes to ACC targeting So why did Act object to ACC's tender to reduce work injuries in the manufacturing sector, with targets for Māori and Pacific workers who have disproportionately higher injuries? 'There are two very different things here,' said Seymour. 'Do we believe in devolution and competition, and choice in the delivery of social services and we absolutely do. 'But then there is the question of 'should you then group your patients and commission different levels of service, regardless of who the providers are, by their ethnic background?' ACC Minister Scott Simpson had initially believed he had followed the cabinet circular, said Seymour. 'But the cabinet is very clear. It says you can use ethnicity as a variable for directing resources but you need to be very sure there aren't other variables that you could have used first – because we have so much more data than just a person's ethnicity and we can do far more accurate targeting if we are prepared to use the richness of data we have in the IDI [Statistics NZ's Integrated Data Infrastructure] rather than just defaulting to race. 'We need to be a lot more nuanced and sophisticated in our use of data,' said Seymour. ACC has since changed its practices. New guidance for staff has been developed to support the application of the Cabinet Office Circular to ACC's commissioning practices, said Andy Milne, ACC deputy chief executive for strategy, engagement and prevention. 'This will ensure that we evidence the need for any targeted commissioning and demonstrate that we are following the guidelines set out in the Government's circular.' ACC data showed that Māori and Pacific people disproportionately experience high injury rates in the manufacturing sector, which is one of five high-risk priority areas for ACC. In 2024, 18% of work-related weekly compensation claims in manufacturing impacted Māori (Māori constitute 14% of the workforce), and 11% of work-related weekly compensation claims in manufacturing impacted Pacific people (10% of the workforce). The original tender sought a target outcome of 5461 claims to be saved by the end of the benefit realisation period (approximately 10 years from the delivery phase). At least 18% of the claims saved were to be from Māori, and 11% from Pacific people. After Act and the minister's intervention, the tender was reissued by ACC without the ethnic targets, and closed last week. Targeted services is 'good government' Nicola Willis took the paper on the circular to cabinet last year as Public Service Minister, and it also revoked the previous Government's affirmative action, the progressive procurement policy, which aimed to get Government agencies to award 8% of their contracts to Māori businesses. 'I am concerned that retaining targets for a specific group (or groups) of businesses based on ethnicity sends the wrong signal to agencies about awarding contracts first and foremost on public value,' Willis wrote. 'I consider this approach, regardless of how carefully it is implemented, leaves an impression of an uneven playing field and a perception (whether warranted or not) of potential discrimination.' The cabinet paper acknowledges the benefits of targeted services, not just to ethnically defined groups but disabled people, seniors, people living in rural area or those with diverse sexualities or gender identities. 'Services targeted or designed for specific population groups are an established feature of good government,' she wrote. But where targeted services were proposed, 'I expect these to be informed by clear evidence of a disparity, and evidence that culturally responsive or population-specific service models would be more effective. In other words, targeted services should coincide with a focus on need…' She said the proposals were consistent with the Crown's obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. 'We are committed to achieving equitable outcomes for all New Zealanders, and I acknowledge this will often require services targeted or tailored to specific ethnic population groups, subject to the analytical rigour proposed in the circular to confirm such need.' 'I believe the need is overwhelming." Labour Social Development spokesman Willie Jackson. Photo / Mark Mitchell Former Māori Development Minister Willie Jackson was one of the first to condemn cuts to targeted programmes in this year's Budget, including the Māori Trade and Training. 'The Government should hang its head in shame after a budget that takes a knife to more Māori programmes,' he said on Budget day. He felt it keenly. For six years as a minister in the Labour-led Government, he worked with Finance Minister Grant Robertson to build up targeted funding for Māori to a total of about $1b a year by 2023. He also drove the now-ditched progressive procurement policy for Māori businesses to get a slice of the $50b annual procurement of Government agencies. In his view, targeted funding, particularly using Māori providers in health and social services, is the most effective way of getting to Māori in the most need. 'I believe the need is overwhelming and the facts show the need is overwhelming in terms of Māori,' he told the Herald. 'There is a big group and a growing group who just trust Māori processes, and their Māori health provider. And they are shell-shocked at the moment.' 'Our people trust our people' He believes the reason Seymour is averse to targeting on race is because it was his way of 'walking away from Treaty obligations.' So why did Labour decide to set up a Māori Health Authority? Was it a Treaty obligation or a measure for more targeted delivery? 'The inability to access health was a huge factor in terms of the Māori Health Authority. Always at the forefront was need, but of course the Treaty was there too,' said Jackson. 'But I believe we always operated from a position of need, and Māori absolutely fulfilled that criteria. That is why I pushed so hard over that time for targeted Māori funding. 'He can call it racist, but our people trust our people.' There were 'incredible gaps' in Māori statistics that needed to be addressed with ''for Māori, by Māori' strategies.' And he believes most New Zealanders supported it. 'They just want common sense. They want fairness. They don't want extreme in terms of the Māori stuff and where Māori funding is due. They don't want separate everything.' Jackson was not sure if Labour would go to next year's election promising to reinstate the Māori Health Authority, Te Aka Whai Ora. 'But we will bring back in absolutely Māori-targeted funding. We are committed to targeted funding,' he said. 'We have learnt some of the lessons of the past' 'The reality is Māori want more funding and more resources. I just want to get our people the necessary funding and resources. 'It doesn't have to be in any separate entities, and maybe it won't be if we get back in because we have to learn some of the lessons of the past.' But Robertson acknowledged that funding and resourcing for Māori had been minimal. That was why target funding under Labour rose so much. 'And that is no racist funding. That is funding based on need. 'But also, there is a Treaty obligation. We are a partner, and that's how governments should look at things,' said Jackson. 'It doesn't mean that there is a Māori takeover. It is just an acknowledgement that the biggest need in this country is Māori.' While Jackson believes that National is 'buckling' to David Seymour's view of targeting, it is clear that National's ministers are less vexed by it. 'It was a fiscal, not philosophical' Speaking about the Budget in May, Social Development Minister Louise Upston justified ending funding for Māori Trades and Training on the basis it had been time-limited funding and that was where she first looked for savings. 'The Māori Trades Training fund was established during Covid times and then extended in 2022 and due to expire 30 June 2025,' she said. 'For things that were due to end, there had to be a very, very strong reason why I would have to continue them and have to find savings elsewhere.' Budget 2025 had focused on employment, and the intervention that had been the most successful was case management 'so that is where we have focused the resources'. In the past year, it had funded $21 million for 52 providers for expenses incurred on programmes that supported Māori through Trades and Training. But Upston insisted it was a fiscal decision, not a philosophical one based on the Cabinet Office Circular approved by Cabinet. Louise Upston said the focus in this year's budget went on case management. Photo / Mark Mitchell 'Totally and absolutely. It had nothing to do with the name of it. I looked at all programmes that had a time limit.' She said she had felt no need to conduct any reviews of programmes in Social Development in the light of the circular. 'If you look at Social Development, it is pretty clear who is over-represented in job seeker numbers. It is young people, it is Māori, it is Pasifika, it is disabled and to a lesser degree, women. 'What I wanted to do is make sure we are funding initiatives that are effective, and we have data and evidence to prove they have the greatest impact at supporting people back into employment.' The He Poutama Rangatahi programme for young people not in education, employment or training (Neets) continued, with $33 million, down from $44 million, but that is targeted at all Neets. Housing Minister Chris Bishop, with Finance Minister Nicola Willis, says he wants a more granular housing system. Photo / Mark Mitchell Housing funding consolidated Housing Minister Chris Bishop said the targeted Māori housing fund, Whai Kainga Whai Oranga, administered by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development and Te Puni Kokiri, had been consolidated into a single funding source with several other housing funds. 'The money hasn't disappeared. It has just been consolidated into a different fund, and one of the things that fund will be looking at is who they can partner with in order to deliver houses for people in need. 'The intention is for the Government to be much more deliberate and targeted about the housing solutions that are invested in around the country. 'That fund will end up investing in a range of different Māori housing solutions around the country.' He was confident it would be an effective fund for supporting iwi in post-settlement governance entities and Māori land trusts that wanted to do things in housing. 'What we are doing with the housing system is to move towards a much more granular system, more evidence-based, where we focus on the right house in the right place for the right people. 'The system at the moment is way too much one-system-fits-all.' He said he wanted the system to be more targeted to need. 'We know where the housing need is, but the system doesn't actually cater for that at the moment. We know where the regional needs are.' There was a role in working with Māori housing providers 'in the same way as there is a role for kura kaupapa, there is a role in working with Māori health providers, who did an excellent job during the Covid pandemic, for example.' Bishop's office later confirmed that $188 million in uncommitted Māori housing operating funding and $383 million capital funding were reprioritised. New housing priorities include: $200m for 400 affordable rentals to be delivered through Māori housing projects ($48m opex; $151m capex) $168m for 550 social housing places to be delivered in Auckland ($128m opex; $40m capex) $300m for 650-900 social and affordable rentals through the new Flexible fund ($41m opex; 250m capex) What's the answer to disadvantage? So, back to Seymour for the last word. What would Seymour's approach be to lifting Māori out of the state of disadvantage they find themselves in in so many social statistics? The answer is dynamism. 'First of all, it's not all Māori and not only Māori. I would say all people who are in a state of disadvantage will benefit from a more dynamic opportunity because when there is more dynamism, there is more opportunity. 'For example, if there are more homes being built, it is more likely a young person will end up owning one. 'If there are more companies being formed with more capital investment, it is more likely that someone who doesn't have a good job or opportunity right now will get one. 'If there is more innovation and more schools opening up that are engaging students in newer and better ways, it is more likely that a person who doesn't have a good opportunity to get an education will get one. 'In my view, it is dynamism. We are seeing this with whole countries. You look at South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Ireland, some of the more successful eastern European countries such as Estonia, they've gone, often in less than two generations, from a situation where essentially everyone is destitute and down on their luck and lacking opportunity…to dynamic opportunity. 'Suddenly, new companies are being built, new houses are being built, and people have recovered their self-esteem because they have taken on challenges and overcome their challenges. 'That's the only thing in my view that makes anyone feel good.'
Scoop
11 hours ago
- Scoop
Bringing Families Together With Parent Boost
The Government is delivering on its commitment to support parents living offshore to visit and stay with their families in New Zealand for longer, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Education Minister Erica Stanford say. Beginning in September, a new 'Parent Boost' visa would grant the parents of New Zealand citizens and residents multi-entry access for up to five years, provided they meet specific health, income, and insurance requirements. 'In order to drive economic growth, we need to incentivise skilled migrants to choose New Zealand,' Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says. 'Ensuring we continue to attract the right people with the skills this country needs will deliver significant economic and social benefits for all New Zealanders.' 'We know that a longer-term visitor visa for parents is an important consideration for migrants who are deciding where they want to build their lives,' Immigration Minister Erica Stanford says. 'Whether it be welcoming a new child, additional support during health challenges or providing childcare so parents can work, there is nothing quite like having family support close by.' 'We are proud to deliver this coalition agreement between National and ACT, which will make the New Zealand proposition more appealing and more competitive.' To be eligible for a Parent Boost visa, applicants must: have an eligible sponsor who is a New Zealand citizen or resident meet Acceptable Standard of Health requirements demonstrate they have at least one year of health insurance coverage which provides emergency medical cover (of at least up to $250,000), repatriation, return of remains and cancer treatment (of at least $100,000) and maintain this insurance for the entire duration they are in New Zealand meet character requirements and be a bona fide / genuine visitor while offshore during the 3rd year of the multiple entry visitor visa, complete a new medical assessment and demonstrate they have maintained their insurance One of the following income requirements must also be met: The sponsor must earn the median wage to sponsor one parent, joint sponsors must earn 1.5x the median wage; or The parent/s have an ongoing income aligning with the single rate of New Zealand Superannuation for a single parent and the couple rate for a couple; or The parent/s have available funds of $160,000 for a single parent and $250,000 for a couple to support themselves for the duration of their visa 'The Parent Boost Visa strikes the balance of making New Zealand more attractive for people who want to make our beautiful country their home, without putting additional strain on public services,' Ms Stanford says. 'We are committed to delivering an efficient and predictable immigration system that drives economic growth to take New Zealand forward.' Parent Boost applications open on 29 September 2025. The sponsor must also remain living in New Zealand while visa holder is onshore and are liable for any costs incurred in relation to the visa holder during the visa duration Applicants will be able to renew the visa once, meaning the maximum length of their visit could be 10 years. People will need to spend three months out of New Zealand prior to getting their second Parent Boost visa.
