Prime Minister Congratulates Albanese And Wong
Rt Hon Christopher Luxon
Prime Minister
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has congratulated Anthony Albanese on winning the Australian Federal Election, and Lawrence Wong on winning the Singaporean election.
'I have been in touch with both Mr Albanese and Mr Wong to offer my congratulations on retaining office,' Mr Luxon says.
'When we spoke, Mr Albanese and I affirmed our strong working relationship. New Zealand has no better friend and no greater ally than Australia. Working together is even more important now as we both face the most challenging global environment in decades. We are stronger on the world stage together.
'I look forward to continuing to work with Mr Albanese on a range of issues including our shared security, partnering in the Pacific, and making the trans-Tasman business environment ever more seamless.'
Mr Luxon has also congratulated Lawrence Wong on his recent election victory in Singapore.
'Singapore is a key partner for New Zealand in Southeast Asia, and I am eager to continue to strengthen our bilateral relations and collaborate on regional and global challenges.
'Both Australia and Singapore are indispensable partners for New Zealand. I am committed to enhancing our cooperation with both countries as we navigate the complexities of the current global landscape.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
3 hours ago
- Newsroom
Why our rates are rising as valuations drop – and the wealthy exceptions to the rule
Analysis: Howls of pain are emerging from Auckland as homeowners compare the declines in this week's new rateable valuations with the rises in their rates bills, taking effect from the start of next month. My family lives in Onehunga. This week's new figures show our home's rateable valuation is down 8 percent on 2021, yet our rates will rise about 5.8 percent ($315) from July 1. Add to that a 7.2 percent hike to Watercare charges, and it's costly. (Not everybody's valuation has diminished. For instance – and for the property voyeurs among us – the capital value of the Mowbray mansion in Coatesville has increased 3 percent, from $39.3 million to $40.5m. The CV for the former Hotchin mansion in Ōrākei has jumped from $58m to $72.5m.) On average, Aucklanders' CVs have dropped 9 percent. And while Auckland's cries may echo loudest, because there are more of us, the discrepancies are even more stark elsewhere in the country. Wellington residents, for instance, will pay on average 16.9 percent more in rates, even though their property values have dropped 24.4 percent – a big chunk out of their wealth that will push some into negative equity (on the books, at least). The Mowbray mansion in Coatesville has increased from $39.3 million to $40.5m. Nelson locals face a 6.5 percent rates rise, despite their house values dropping 9.4 percent. Understandably, homeowners' realisations that they are are less wealthy, yet they're being asked to pay more, will harden opposition to rates rises. And that will shape the political debate in October's local elections. Christopher Luxon's Government has told councils to 'get back to the basics' of fixing pipes, filling potholes, and delivering core local services. Challenger local candidates who promise to rein in rates rises will no doubt get a more sympathetic hearing from local electors; those incumbents who are aware just how hard that is will struggle make their arguments heard. But let's set aside some of the spin and look at this more dispassionately. Rates hikes v residential property valuation changes The ways in which central government taxes and local government rates are set are critically different. Central government starts with tax rates (PAYE, company tax, GST, etc) then asks revenue officials to make an informed guess about what that rate will raise. If my gross earnings increase, I pay more tax – but generally I don't complain too much because I can see it's a consistent rate. Every year, as individual and company earnings and expenditure increase, the Government takes a bigger clip from a bigger ticket – and that helps cover its increased costs servicing a growing population. What this means is that the Government increases its tax take every year, without having to make any active decision. The passing of the Budget Appropriation Bill does not require MPs to vote on increasing tax revenue. MPs don't face the wrath of those who elected them, for voting in favour of a tax revenue rise. It just happens. Every year. Local government is required to work the other way round. It predicts how much money it will need to service its own growing population, then works backwards to decide how big an increase in rates revenues is needed to pay for that. What this means is that when your house value rises, increasing your equity and making you more wealthy, that doesn't flow through to paying more rates. All it does is slightly change the share you pay of your city or district's total rates bill, relative to your neighbour whose house value may have declined. The net effect is that over the past century, tax increases have massively outstripped rates rises, leaving local government genuinely struggling to pay the bills. Tax v rates as a percentage of GDP The Government's tax take relative to GDP has soared, while council rates have remained static. Source: Productivity Commission That's why Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown, this week, is putting the hard word on the Government to allow the city to charge bed taxes to fund tourism infrastructure. That's why Local Government NZ and its members (61 of the country's 67 city and district councils) have been pushing for new revenue tools, like a share of local GST take, or the ability to charge rates on Crown estate. That's right, even though the Government's books are in a much healthier state than councils', and its debt is lower by global measures, it still exempts itself from paying rates. So, as the local government elections roll around in October, by all means hold your councillors to account on their spending and the rates rises they've imposed – but listen cautiously to MPs who punch down on cash-strapped councils. Be sure you're comparing apples with apples – because the big picture is, successive governments have increased their tax take far faster than councils have hiked their rates.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Opinion: China offers NZ certainty and long-term prosperity
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon with China's President Xi Jinping at the Apec Summit in Peru last year. THREE KEY FACTS Though geographically far apart, China and New Zealand share broad common interests. Since establishing diplomatic ties more than five decades ago, the two countries have worked towards a relationship based on mutual respect and mutual accommodation, focusing on cooperation that benefits both peoples. Guided by the spirit
RNZ News
9 hours ago
- RNZ News
Scientists hit back over Prime Minister's 'worthies' insult
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon makes a tourism funding boost announcement at Auckland Airport. Photo: Marika Khabazi A British scientist says it's concerning Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has dismissed him and other climate scientists as "worthies" for raising concerns about plans to lower the country's methane emissions target. Global professor of environmental change at Oxford University Paul Behrens said the government appeared to be trying to deflect attention from questions about the country's agricultural greenhouse gases. "I think the characterisation of climate scientists as 'worthies' reflects a really concerning dismissal of evidence-based policy making," he said. "While the Prime Minister's remarks may aim to deflect criticism of New Zealand's agricultural emissions profile they overlook the clear global consensus that methane reductions are critical to limiting near term warming." Luxon denied he was dismissing science or deflecting attention from this country's farming emissions. "What a load of rubbish, my point was very clear, those scientists can write to leaders of 194 countries before they send it to me," he said. Christopher Luxon says New Zealand is already managing methane emissions better than "every other country on the planet". Photo: Gianina Schwanecke / Country Life Though a decision is yet to be revealed, farming groups appear have swayed the government to reduce the current target, which is shrinking emissions somewhere between 24 and 47 per cent by 2050. Several climate experts say the country will set a dangerous precedent for Ireland and other big methane emitters if it aims too low. When 26 international climate change scientists wrote to Luxon accusing him of "ignoring scientific evidence" showing global heating caused by methane has to reduce, the prime minister said it was lovely if "worthies" wanted to write him letters but New Zealand was already managing methane emissions better than "every other country on the planet". The scientists were worried that the government might be about to adopt a target that lets heating caused by methane emissions stay the same, rather than turning down the thermostat on the country's cows and sheep. That is because the government asked a scientific panel to tell it how much methane emissions would need to drop to just level off global heating from methane, not reduce it. The answer was 14 to 24 per cent by 2050, about half the current target. The debate is whether that is enough. Federated Farmers and Beef + Lamb says yes, because methane is much shorter lived than the other main heating gases, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide. One of the members of the government's panel, climate scientist Dave Frame, said New Zealand should lower its target unless other countries commit to bigger cuts to methane from farming than they have currently. He said the planet was not on track to limit heating inside 1.5C hotter than pre-industrial times, despite countries' promises. "If the world really did cut emissions in line with what those kind of guys are talking about, then I think we should absolutely be part of it. "In the absence of that action, I think a 'no additional warming target' is a reasonable fall back position." Victoria University Professor of Climate Change Dave Frame. Photo: RNZ / Chris Bramwell Dr Frame said unlike more profitable dairy farming, sheep and beef farms could not absorb the cost of methane-cutting technologies. Another member of the government's panel atmospheric scientist Laura Revell said it was a tricky call for the government. "Everyone is in agreement - those on the panel, those who wrote the letter - that methane is a greenhouse gas which global action is needed to address," she said. "We know that the consequences of climate change are severe, we are seeing it already and every bit of warming we can avoid helps. "On the other hand, farming is a big part of the New Zealand economy and these emissions are associated with feeding people." The Climate Change Commission said the country should aim for a cut of at least 35 percent, because the costs and impacts of global heating are turning out worse than expected. It said there is no reasonable excuse to do less on methane, under New Zealand's climate commitments. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
