MPs challenged to rely on public health system, drop private insurance
'Essentially, we want fair and transparent leadership with integrity. We want people who have skin in the game.'
The test was whether politicians were 'comfortable and confident' enough to rely on the public health system for their families, he said.
'If it's good for them, it's good for us. If it's not good enough for them, it shouldn't be good enough for anyone.'
The letter asks MPs to consider questions like:
'Would I be comfortable with my child waiting six months for this procedure?'
'Is this emergency department adequate for my elderly parent?'
'Are these staffing levels sufficient for my family's safety?'
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon did not believe having private health insurance meant he was out of touch with the problems besetting the public system.
'I think we're well aware of the challenges in the healthcare system, which is why we've put a record amount of investment in,' he said.
'We inherited again a botched merger that just created a layer of bureaucracy and we've put the money in, we're hiring more people, we've got clarity on the targets.
'We're starting to see some stabilisation of those targets and in some cases improvements on those health targets.
'But we now need a high-performing Health NZ, and that's what we're fixated on.'
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon does not believe having private health insurance meant he is out of touch. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Labour's health spokesperson Dr Ayesha Verrall said MPs with private health insurance were 'betting their own money against the public system'.
'Ministers of Health should place a bet on the public health system succeeding and meeting New Zealanders' needs. Having private health insurance is a sign that you're not willing to place that bet.'
Labour's health spokesperson Dr Ayesha Verrall says MPs with private health insurance are "betting their own money against the public system". Photo / Mark Mitchell
Labour Party leader Chris Hipkins – a former health minister himself – took a less hard-line approach.
'I got health insurance 20 or 30 years ago as a union membership benefit and I've kept it since then, although I'm fortunate I haven't really had to use it.
'I'm not going to begrudge people who have it, but I want to make sure that if you haven't, you still get the standard of care you deserve.'
Health Minister Simeon Brown said he did not have private health insurance, but he would not impose that choice on anyone else.
'Ultimately, there's a large number of New Zealanders who use health insurance, that's a fantastic part of our health system, and ultimately people make individual choices.'
Brown said his focus was on timely access to quality healthcare for New Zealanders, which included making better use of the private sector.
'We will work with private hospitals to unlock capacity, publicly funded [patients] but in private hospitals to speed up access.'
Simeon Brown confirmed he doesn't have private health insurance but wouldn't impose that on others. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Education Minister Erica Stanford both have private health insurance.
Mental Health Minister Matt Doocey does not, saying he is 'happy using the public health system'.
Other National MPs were more coy.
Minister of Climate Change, Energy, Local Government and Revenue, Simon Watts: 'I won't answer that, it's a personal question.'
Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector, Disability Issues, Social Development and Employment, Louise Upston: 'That's not a question in the public interest.'
Bay of Plenty MP Tom Rutherford: 'I'm not interested in talking about that. It's not necessary for people to know – I don't go out into the general street and ask people about their health insurance.'
Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March said it was 'quite rich' to see politicians not being worried about the state of the public healthcare system, when they had the means to pay for private insurance or private care.
'That is why we are really concerned with the Government's flirtation with privatising more of our public healthcare system, which will ultimately see our poorest less able to access basic healthcare.'
Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March slammed politicians for ignoring public healthcare issues while pushing privatization that harms the poor. Photo / Mark Mitchell
For some Labour MPs, it was a matter of principle.
Kelston MP Carmel Sepuloni: 'I believe as politicians if we're going to be working to ensure the healthcare system works for everyone, we should be reliant on it too.'
Nelson MP Rachel Boyack: 'My father was a public health chief executive so I've always had a strong belief in the public health system, and that the health system should be available to all New Zealanders, and that includes me as an MP.'
Mt Albert MP Helen White could understand why some people opted to have it, but it was not for her: 'I just think that I should live by my principles. Also, I probably couldn't afford it. I know I'm on a decent salary, but it's a lot of money.'
Labour MP Ginnie Andersen said health insurance was not in her budget: 'By the time I pay my mortgage and my insurance and my rates and feed my children.'
Act Party leader David Seymour, who is also the Associate Health Minister, said the health workers made 'an interesting argument' – but in his view, MPs should come from a broad range of backgrounds.
'I don't think you should have to fit into a sort of ideological straight-jacket to do that.'
The health workers behind the letter said MPs who refused to give up their private safety net would be revealing 'exactly what they really think about our healthcare system'.
'We'll be watching to see who has the courage to put their family where their policies are.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
44 minutes ago
- Otago Daily Times
NZ 'back on course', govt says
By Russell Palmer of RNZ The government has launched a defence of its record on tackling the cost of living. Finance Minister Nicola Willis joined Prime Minister Christopher Luxon at the Beehive Theatrette for the weekly post-Cabinet briefing. She spent much of the previous week facing questions about her meeting with Fonterra chief executive Miles Hurrell. Luxon said this week marked a full year since the tax bracket changes National campaigned on had come into effect. "It's only through a strong economy that wages rise faster than inflation, that Kiwis can get ahead of their daily costs and our businesses can take risks that can mean that they can invest, grow, and create more jobs," he said. He directly targeted National's main rival in opposition. "Other parties in Parliament believe that raising taxes, growing the public sector, and giving more handouts to those who refuse to work is the answer. Taxing more, spending more, and borrowing more as Labour and others advocate for didn't work in the past and it won't work in the future." The government's decision to increase fees paid to board members on Crown entities - in some cases up to 80 percent - may undercut the messaging that National is prioritising low and middle-income New Zealanders' interests. But Luxon today pointed to the building products changes announced over the weekend, and the proposed ban on payment surcharges as recent examples. He then pointed to other items in the government's agenda, including: the current pipeline of infrastructure projects, Roads of National Significance, completing the City Rail Link, signing trade deals with the United Arab Emirates and Gulf Cooperation Council, starting negotiations with India, the digital nomads visa, and the Investment Boost policy. Willis soon picked up the baton, rattling off her own list of changes the government had made which she said had helped lower costs, including: the Family Boost policy, ending the Reserve Bank's secondary mandate to account for unemployment, curbing government spending, changing residential tenancy laws, tax deductability changes for landlords, delaying the previous government's petrol excise increases, scrapping the Auckland Regional Fuel Tax, increasing rates rebates for seniors, increasing Working for Families support, and extending maximum subscription lengths. She said National had campaigned on tackling the cost of living crisis, and pointed to rising GDP per capita and wages rising faster than inflation as a result of the government's interventions. "Taking the pressure off inflation - that is the general level of price increases across the economy - helps with the cost side of the cost-of-living equation. Lower inflation means less pressure on prices... it's pleasing to say that wages are now growing faster than inflation and forecasts show this trend continuing over the next few years." She said the government's tax changes meant "households have benefited by an average of $60 a fortnight". The change to interest deductibility for landlords had helped to take the heat out of the rental market, she said, noting "the 2.6 increase for the year to June was the lowest since 2011". She said the government was also making big structural changes, saying "the last government conclusively proved that band aids are not enough" and pointing to a series of policies yet to come to fruition: the Going for Housing Growth policy, Fast-tracking renewable energy consenting, work to address supermarket competition, and to curb council rates increases. "Economies are like oil tankers, you can't turn them around on a dime. But New Zealand is back on course," Willis said. The lists of government achievements kept coming, with Willis also pointing to: education reform, the investment boost (again), promoting global trade and investment, changes to the research and development sector, and "delivering infrastructure projects faster and better". Meanwhile, a Cabinet Office Circular reveals the government signed off on increases to fees available to board members of Crown entities. This includes increases of 30 percent for Group 2 and 4 boards and Audit and Risk committees, and an increase of 80 percent for Group 3 bodies. Luxon said the public sector director fees "have got completely out of whack compared to private sector fees". "Obviously we will never pay as much as someone in the private sector but when you are spending $32 billion on healthcare for example, it's important that we are actually able to attract really good governors for the Health NZ board, for example," he said. The changes took effect at the start of July.
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Govt to increase Crown body board members' fee ranges, in some cases by 80%
He said the public sector had got 'out of whack' compared with the private sector. Luxon said when billions of dollars are being spent on the likes of healthcare, it's 'important that we actually are able to attract really good governance, of Health New Zealand for example'. 'This is just acknowledging that we need to make sure that we can attract good people.' Asked what his message was to someone struggling with the cost of living while the Government was lifting board fees, Luxon pointed to other actions the Government had taken. He mentioned efforts to clamp down on inflation, pouring money into new infrastructure, and today's announcement of removing surcharges from card payments. The Cabinet Fees Framework lays out a range of fee levels for appointees to different bodies and criteria that appointees are marked against. The higher their score, the more they could be paid. It applies to members of a range of bodies or groups the Crown has an interest in, such as royal commissions, ministerial inquiries and some governance boards. However, it doesn't cover pay set by the Remuneration Authority, which deals with MPs, the judiciary and the heads of various commissions and authorities. The framework is reviewed every three years by the Public Service Commission, which reports to Cabinet on the fees. A Cabinet Circular today revealed the new pay ranges. Photo / Mark Mitchell The circular issued today says Cabinet agreed to a revised framework that took effect from July 1. A list of 'main changes' from the previous framework include 'an increase of 80% to the fee ranges' for some governance boards and 'an increase of 30%' for other bodies. It is 'not intended to be prescriptive, and judgment will be required to determine best fit', the document says. It enables a 'consistent approach' to setting fees across bodies. The new framework says setting fees should 'support the appointment of appropriately qualified and diverse body members', contain expenditure within 'reasonable limits' and 'provide flexibility'. 'The framework enables fees to be determined by ministers and other fee-setting authorities who are most familiar with the work of particular bodies.' There is a lengthy process of setting or reviewing members' fees, which takes into account the complexity of their role, the degree to which the role is in the public eye, and recruitment or retention issues. 'Fees will continue to be set on a fair but conservative basis to reflect a discount for the element of public service involved,' the framework says. Members occupying identical positions on the same body should be paid the same rate, but the framework says in some cases it 'is necessary to secure people with scarce specialist skills' and therefore consideration may be given to a higher fee. Alternatively, a fee lower than the suggested range could also be paid in some circumstances. The framework says the schedule of fees 'reflects the nature of their business environment and the role requirements'. The 80% increase applies to the fee range for governance boards responsible for most Crown entities. The top range, for those appointees given the highest scores against the set criteria, is between $73,100 and $162,200 for a chair and between $36,500 and $80,400 for a member. This compares to the previous 2022 framework, which had a range of $40,596 to $90,123 for chairs and $20,295 to $44,655 for members. The new bottom range for this group is between $25,800 and $54,200 for a chair and between $12,900 and $27,100 for a member. On the face of it, to be in the top range, an appointee would need to chair the governance board of an entity with a budget in the hundreds of millions of dollars or above, and with more than one primary function. This would require consultation with the commission. The range reflects an annual rate, which the framework says is consistent with the private sector and is appropriate given the workload is 'predictable and/or substantial'. It's expected these members work about 30 days a year, 'which is in line with the amount of time spent by board directors in private sector companies', while chairs are expected to work about 50 days a year. 'The fees for chairs is set at approximately twice the rate of the members to take account of both the differences in responsibility and in workload,' the framework says. 'Where it is anticipated that a chair or members will have a lesser workload than above, it is expected that this be reflected in the fee level.' One group has had its fee ranges increased by 80%. Another grouping with its own fee ranges are members of statutory tribunals and authorities. This is reflected in a daily rate as it is expected their workload will be 'unpredictable'. The top range for these chairs is between $995 and $1550, or between $640 and $990 for members. The bottom range is between $525 and $770 for chairs, and between $416 and $500 for members. A range of additional information is also provided around expenses, how to review current members' fees and where exceptions to the framework could apply. A report from the Institute of Directors in October found directors' fees had not been keeping pace with inflation. 'Despite some claims that directors are overpaid, non-executive director fees rarely increase in line with general employee increases or inflation.' Jamie Ensor is a political reporter in the NZ Herald press gallery team based at Parliament. He was previously a TV reporter and digital producer in the Newshub press gallery office. In 2025, he was a finalist for Political Journalist of the Year at the Voyager Media Awards.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Te Pāti Māori announces Ikaroa-Rāwhiti candidate Hayley Maxwell
Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech. Haley Maxwell co-ordinated the Toitu Te Tiriti hīkoi in Gisborne. By Russell Palmer of RNZ Te Pāti Māori has announced Haley Maxwell will stand for next year's general election - for the one Māori seat currently held by Labour. Maxwell helped organise the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti in the region last year. 'Haley Maxwell spearheaded the historic Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti from Te Tairāwhiti right through to Kahungunu. Haley embodies the fierce compassion and courage that Ikaroa-Rāwhiti is famous for,' Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said in a written statement. 'She has stood on the marae, in the courts and on the streets for our people. Parliament will be a stronger house with her voice echoing the roar of Te Tairāwhiti.'
