
New Zealand's budget cuts punish public sector, business and workers
WELLINGTON, May 21 (Reuters) - At a trendy cafe in downtown Wellington, job seekers gather to share tips on how to find work in New Zealand's capital, where deep government spending cuts have led to thousands of public sector job losses and squeezed the city's economy.
Rebecca Thomson, a communications specialist who started the informal support group after she couldn't find work as a government contractor during the cuts, says competition for positions is fierce.
"We were told survive until 2025 and it will get better. Well, we're now in May 2025 and it doesn't feel better," said Thomson, who is currently doing paid freelance work.
New Zealand's conservative coalition government releases its annual budget on Thursday and is expected to continue to push fiscal discipline with many ministries not expected to see budget increases.
Spending cuts since December 2023 have been felt across the wider economy but perhaps most acutely in Wellington, a city of nearly 210,000 where the government has historically been a major employer.
House prices in Wellington have plunged 6.8% over the past year, far exceeding the national decline of 1.1%. Population growth stagnated in 2024, contrasting with a 1.7% increase nationwide. Consumer and economic sentiment in the city remains lower than in many other regions, with businesses and residents expressing concern over the city's prospects.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was elected in 2023, promising to cut "wasteful spending". His campaign for fiscal discipline preceded a significantly more high profile push by U.S. President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk to make Washington more efficient, which has led to the loss of thousands of U.S. public sector jobs.
"It's pretty clear that the impact on Wellington, from the government baseline spending cuts, and also the reduction in spending on contractors, has been quite negative," said Westpac New Zealand Chief Economist Kelly Eckhold.
"You can see that in pretty much any indicator of activity or house prices going on in Wellington right now."
According to data from the Public Service Commission, public sector employment fell 4.2% in the year leading up to December 2024.
Additionally, the government slashed NZ$300 million ($177.63 million) or about a third of the budget allocated to hiring contractors in the year to June 30, 2024, further tightening the purse strings. Several infrastructure projects were cancelled, including much of Wellington's flagship public transport project.
Baseline spending at the upcoming 2025 budget is expected to be smallest in a decade. While the government has foreshadowed an increase in infrastructure spending, the overall fiscal strategy remains tight and is unlikely to help Wellington's economy.
Finance Minister Nicola Willis said in a speech earlier this month that a tight fiscal strategy was necessary to keep interest rates low and ensure New Zealand continues to be seen as a good place to invest.
That fiscal prudence combined with New Zealand's relatively low government debt is seen as safeguarding the country's economic stability and keeping a favourable sovereign credit rating.
However, opposition leader Chris Hipkins said the cuts have led to increased spending on unemployment benefits.
"Now is exactly the time for government to make the investments we need in infrastructure, housing, health, and our environment so we are creating jobs and get New Zealand moving again," Hipkins argued in a pre-Budget speech.
But while the cuts have led to public sector strikes, the latest polls indicate that the current coalition of the National Party, New Zealand First and ACT would retain power in an election.
Economists say fiscal tightening is creating ripple effects across the economy.
Ganesh Nana, former commissioner of the now-defunct Productivity Commission, and 14 other economists, wrote to the prime minister and finance minister in November, warning their approach risked "a long-lasting hollowing-out" of business.
"When redundancies occur, affected individuals don't simply wait for the private sector to step in," Nana told Reuters. "They often seek opportunities abroad, leading to an immediate loss of capacity for the New Zealand economy."
Shay Peters, chief executive for recruiter Robert Walters in New Zealand and Australia, said there was general nervousness in the contractor community for the next financial year, which starts July 1.
"In Wellington, we're seeing institutionalised hospitality organisations shutting down," he said. "It's just pretty dire."
Emily Turner, who has been working in various public service jobs for 25 years, finished her contract as a strategic communications manager at the Workforce Development Council in Wellington last June and thought she'd have work by Christmas.
She is now living off her savings and has been unable to add anything to her retirement fund. Turner said she'd be keen to leave Wellington but with a mortgage and lower house prices, such a move is not an option.
"I'm in a financial trap," she said.
($1 = 1.6889 New Zealand dollars)
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Belfast Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Why Spending Review offers Stormont a huge opportunity to bring about reforms
A three-year settlement from the Chancellor provides a chance for the Executive to take longer-term look at what it funds and how Westminster's imminent Spending Review will set the social and economic tone for the whole of the UK. Its implications for Northern Ireland will be significant, as will the Executive's decisions about the funding it receives. Chancellor Rachel Reeves' announcement on Wednesday, June 11, will signal the Labour Government's priorities for the rest of this mandate and set funding allocations for the next three years. This settlement is intended to give stability to Government departments and provide time and space to plan spending, investment and reform.


North Wales Chronicle
32 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Vital routes to be protected as part of buses overhaul
Councils in England will put strict requirements in place before 'socially necessary' routes can be changed or cancelled, the department said. This is aimed at services to locations such as hospitals and schools. The measure is part of the Government's Bus Services Bill, which reached its second reading in the House of Commons on Monday. This will lead to an overhaul of buses, such as by giving all local transport authorities new powers to run their own services. The Government will also reduce some of the red tape involved in bus franchising, including reducing the minimum period between local areas taking control of services and being allowed to start operations. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said: 'We're committed to giving local leaders the power to shape the bus services their communities rely on. 'Our Bus Services Bill is a big step forward, protecting vital services that people depend on to get to work, school or essential appointments. 'We have taken a decisive step towards better buses, building on our £1 billion investment to improve and maintain bus services, keeping people connected, driving up living standards and growing the economy.' Ben Plowden, of lobby group the Campaign for Better Transport, said: 'Buses are the most-used form of public transport. 'Preserving vital bus services has long been central to our campaigning, so the new protections in the Bus Services Bill are very welcome indeed. 'Protecting existing services, and identifying and filling gaps in the network, is the way to ensure everyone can access opportunities and stay connected.' Conservative shadow transport secretary Gareth Bacon attacked the Bus Services Bill as 'an ideological move that threatens essential services'. He said: 'They scrapped the £2 fare cap, slashed support for routes, and now want to strip away safeguards so councils can seize control of networks they aren't capable of operating. 'This is about Labour clinging to a fantasy of municipal socialism, whatever the cost to those who rely on local transport. Without the requirement to prove any benefit to passengers, Labour-run councils will be free to run yet another public service into the ground. 'We're not opposed to local decision-making. But this Bill offers no real investment, no credible delivery model, and no route to better services.'


Scotsman
36 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Scottish Government turns its back on nature and communities
Scottish Green Party co-leader Lorna Slater When I was the Minister for Biodiversity, I had the privilege of launching the process to create Scotland's third national park. It was an exciting moment, a chance to protect and celebrate some of our most precious natural landscapes and to deliver jobs, investment and pride to rural communities. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Among the strongest candidates for that designation was Galloway. A region rich in natural beauty and history but with real challenges in the local economy. That's why I was so deeply disappointed and saddened by the Scottish Government's decision not to create a Galloway National Park. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A National Park would have brought around £10 million a year to the area, created jobs and given the confidence to housebuilders and entrepreneurs to invest. It could have been transformative for the people of Galloway and for nature. Unfortunately, a campaign led by landed interests and, in some cases peddling misinformation, has undermined the project. Denise Brownlee and Liz Hitschmann have been prominent in the campaign against plans for a Galloway National Park It's a short-sighted move that will have a long-lasting and damaging impact I don't believe the Scottish Government, or those who campaigned against the park, are fully appreciating. The campaign to create a national park in Galloway has been led by local community volunteers for more than a decade. By missing out on being Scotland's next national park, Galloway has missed out on millions of pounds in investment, high-quality jobs and supported sustainable tourism that could underpin the region's economy for generations to come. The Scottish Government could have worked harder to advocate for the park, to challenge the large landowners and to counter the misinformation about the park. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This decision sits alongside another deeply troubling one: the government's move to overturn the rejection of the controversial Flamingo Land development on the shores of Loch Lomond. Despite being opposed by more than 155,000 people and unanimously rejected by the national park authority, Ministers have now given the green light to a vast commercial resort in one of our most iconic natural locations. It's a slap in the face to everyone who stood up for Loch Lomond and for the principle of democratic, locally-driven planning. The Flamingo Land decision sets a dangerous precedent. It shows that even when local voices and expert planning decisions say no, big developers can still get their way and the Scottish Government won't stand up for local communities or for nature. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It also highlights the growing disconnect between the Scottish Government's rhetoric on the environment and the decisions it is actually making. Together, these decisions point to a government that is losing its way. Retreating from environmental leadership and turning its back on the communities and places that need support the most. We face a nature emergency in Scotland. Protecting our wild places isn't a luxury, it's a necessity. National parks are one of the best tools we have to deliver nature restoration, support rural jobs and foster pride and resilience in our landscapes and communities. By walking away from the Galloway National Park and backing destructive developments like Flamingo Land, the government is making the wrong choices for people, nature and the climate. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad We can do better. The Scottish Government needs to call in the decision on Flamingo Land and make the correct decision to support the community and nature. I will continue to support the excellent work of our National Parks and the benefits they bring to the communities who host them. Scottish Green party co-leader