Live stream: PM Luxon gives post-Cabinet briefing ahead of Budget
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is holding a media briefing from the Beehive in Wellington after the weekly meeting of Cabinet ministers.
It is the start of Budget week with Finance Minister Nicola Willis set to give details on Thursday of the Government's spending plans for the year ahead.
Ministers have continued to make pre-Budget announcements over the weekend - allocating an extra $1.5 million to Māori Wardens and $164 million over the next four years to expand urgent and after-hours healthcare services.
Meanwhile, the Greens alternative budget last week proposed extending free GP visits, dental care, childcare and introducing an income guarantee — funded by $88 billion in new taxes and billions in additional debt.
Full coverage of the Budget on 1News.co.nz and on TVNZ1's Q+A Special from 2pm on Thursday. New ZealandPoliticsNational PartyChristopher Luxon
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
A vision for NZ: A safe place where everyone can prosper
New Zealand should be 'a safe place where everyone can prosper', writes Bruce Cotterill. Photo of Routburn Track / Supplied by Tourism NZ Opinion by Bruce Cotterill Bruce Cotterill is a professional director and adviser to business leaders. He is the author of the book, The Best Leaders Don't Shout, and host of the podcast, Leaders Getting Coffee. Learn more THE FACTS Last week, I managed to get myself caught up in a lively conversation with a couple of mates. It wasn't heated. But it was one of those discussions that no one was going to win. And then there was the debate after the Budget. The same word
Otago Daily Times
7 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
To infinity and beyond with a possum and sweet chilli sauce
One of the things MPs like most about the Budget debate — the freewheeling discussion of the Finance Minister's hard work — is that it enables them to speak about almost anything so long as it can (sometimes very loosely) be linked back to the Budget. Hence this week our southern MPs have been talking about possums, utes, outer space, Barker's sweet chilli sauce ... and every so often about something of vital importance. On Tuesday Taieri Labour MP Ingrid Leary fell into the latter camp with an impassioned speech about the state of the nation's mental health system. "The Budget would have been the perfect opportunity to [workforce gaps], including the 1594 full-time equivalents that the NCAT — which is the National Committee for Addiction Treatment—has identified as missing from the NGO frontline," Ms Leary said. "But no, they did not. Instead, they threw a paltry bit of money to help the transition at emergency departments for the withdrawal of police. That was far too little, far too late." It was Ms Leary's Labour Dunedin colleague Rachel Brooking who brought possums and utes to the debate soon after — which was fairly funny, albeit with a serious purpose. The Budget had been good for possums, Ms Brooking said, because of cuts to pest management initiatives. And it had been good for utes because of subsidies being afforded to companies. But most of all, Ms Brooking said scornfully, the Budget had been bad for women. "Anyone listening closely to the House when the Budget dropped will have heard me give an audible gasp when I read ... that $12 billion was looking to be saved from pay equity. "Yet the Prime Minister had the gall to say to us just the week before, 'No, no, no. This has nothing to do with pay equity'. It is astounding." And she did not mean that in a good way. Up soon after, Taieri Green list MP Scott Willis warmed up on the topic of people feeling the cold as winter bit hard — although he might have sparked debate on his own side by talking about getting nice and cosy in front of a fire rather than being warmed up by an electric fire powered by solar or wind energy. "What really would have helped people and helped landlords, even, would have been support for warm, dry, energy-efficient homes," Mr Willis said. "But this government, over the last two Budgets, has cut over $230m from the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority ... crippling the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority. Why has this government decided that ordinary Kiwis should be left out in the cold?" The next day the South's government MPs got to give an alternative, all together more enthusiastic appraisal of the Budget. Rather than wreaking havoc on all and sundry, Southland National MP Joseph Mooney extolled it for "balancing the New Zealand taxpayers' funds in a very considered and careful way in a challenging domestic and geopolitical environment." Funding such as new daytime urgent care services in places like Invercargill, Gore, and Alexandra found favour with Mr Mooney, as did the potential expansion of the service to Balclutha, Lumsden, Roxburgh and all places in between in the future. It was Mr Mooney who donned his space suit, noting Southlander Sir Peter Beck had made New Zealand the third-largest launcher of satellites into infinity and beyond. "He had a wild dream and made it happen in a country that did not have a space sector. I think that's an opportunity for all of us to lift our sights high, aim for the stars, and we can make it happen," he said, leaving unspoken but fairly obvious the assertion that the government was helping such firms to focus on the target. Leaving Waitaki MP Miles Anderson — no doubt well aware that many residents in Geraldine would like their town to instead be in the Rangitata electorate — to praise the fine products of Barker's of Geraldine. "I spoke this morning to the team at Barker's of Geraldine — and those of you who have had the opportunity to try some of their goods, I highly recommend them." "Great little place. Sweet chilli sauce," Otaki MP Tim Costley chimed in, a sentiment echoed from across the House. "They supply jams, preserves, and pickles to supermarkets across the country," Mr Anderson added, in his best infomercial manner. There was actually a point to all this spruiking: Mr Anderson wanted to use his time to boast about Investment Boost, the Budget's central policy for business growth. Enabling firms to immediately write off some of the cost of new equipment was a boon for an expanding business like Barker's, he said ... and that was not all for the great electorate of Waitaki. "Other local businesses are also having an increase in asset investment," Mr Anderson said. "Te Pari Industries tell me that they have seen an increase in interest for their products, and that farmers are making decisions much more quickly with both sheep and dairy systems. Drummond & Etheridge in Oamaru, local farm machinery retailers, saw an immediate increase in sales and a significant increase in buyer inquiry." And with a shout out to Five Forks School — pupils from which had visited the House the previous day and been acknowledged from the chamber — that was it for the Budget debate for another year. Half time, change sides Act New Zealand Southland list MP Todd Stephenson is poised to become the most recognisable backbencher in the country following the grand rearrangement of the House this week. With the coalition swapping deputy prime ministers, New Zealand First's MPs have moved to where Act once sat, and vice versa. As Act's whip, Mr Stephenson is now sitting in the second row alongside National chief whip Stuart Smith. That means that during Question Time — the only bit of Parliament that most New Zealanders catch a glimpse of — that Mr Stephenson is sitting right behind Christopher Luxon and David Seymour when the cameras roll.
Scoop
16 hours ago
- Scoop
Resignation Of PM's Press Secretary Highlights Gaps In NZ Law On Covert Recording And Harassment
Article – The Conversation Criminal law struggles to keep up with predatory uses of the technology for image-based sexual abuse. Its time to step back and build future-proof protections. The sudden resignation this week of one of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon's senior press secretaries was politically embarrassing, but also raises questions about how New Zealand law operates in such cases. A Stuff investigation revealed the Beehive staffer allegedly recorded audio of sessions with sex workers, and whose phone contained images and video of women at the gym, supermarket shopping, and filmed through a window while getting dressed. The man at the centre of the allegations has reportedly apologised and said he had sought professional help for his behaviour last year. The police have said the case did not meet the threshold for prosecution. And this highlights the difficulties surrounding existing laws when it comes to non-consensual recording, harassment and image-based harm. Describing his 'shock' at the allegations against his former staffer, the prime minister said he was 'open to revisiting' the laws around intimate audio recordings without consent. If that happens, there are several key areas to consider. Are covert audio recordings illegal? New Zealand law prohibits the non-consensual creation, possession and distribution of intimate visual recordings under sections 216H to 216J of the Crimes Act 1961. These provisions aim to protect individuals' privacy and bodily autonomy in situations where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The definition of 'intimate visual recording' under these sections is limited to visual material, such as photographs, video or digital images, and does not extend to audio-only recordings. As a result, covert audio recordings of sex workers engaged in sexual activity would fall outside the scope of these offences, even though the harm caused is similar. If such audio or video recordings were ever shared with others or posted online, that may be a criminal offence under the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015 – if it can be proved this was done with the intention to cause serious emotional distress. What about covert filming of women in public places? Covert recording of women working out or walking down a road, including extreme closeups of clothed body parts, would unlikely meet the definition of 'intimate visual recording'. That is because they do not typically involve nudity, undergarments or private bodily activities, and they often occur in public places where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. Even extreme closeups may not meet the threshold unless they are taken from beneath or through clothing in a way that targets the genitals, buttocks or breasts. While they are invasive and degrading, they may remain lawful. By contrast, it is more likely that covert filming of women dressing or undressing through a window would satisfy the definition, depending on where the women were. For example, were they in a place where they would have a reasonable expectation of privacy? If the non-consensual recording captures a person in a state of undress, then the creation of such images or videos could be considered a crime. Are any of these behaviours 'harassment'? Under the Harassment Act 1997, 'harassment' is defined as a pattern of behaviour directed at a person that involves at least two specified acts within a 12-month period, or a single continuing act. These acts can include following, watching, or any conduct that causes the person to fear for their safety. Although covert filming or audio recording is not expressly referenced, the acts of following and watching within alleged voyeuristic behaviour, if repeated, could fall within the definition. But harassment is only a crime where it is done with the intent or knowledge that the behaviour will likely cause a person to fear for their safety. This is a threshold that might be difficult to prove in voyeurism or similar cases. Covert recording of women's bodies, whether audio or visual, is part of a broader pattern of gender-based violence facilitated by technology. Feminist legal scholars have framed this as 'image-based sexual abuse'. The term captures how non-consensual creation, recording, sharing or threatening to share intimate content violates sexual autonomy and dignity. This form of harm disproportionately affects women and often reflects gender power imbalances rooted in misogyny, surveillance and control. The concept has become more mainstream and is referenced by law and policymakers in Australia and the United Kingdom. Has New Zealand law kept up? Some forms of image-based sexual abuse are criminalised in New Zealand, but others are not. What we know of this case suggests some key gaps remain – largely because law reform has been piecemeal and reactive. For example, the intimate visual recording offences in the Crimes Act were introduced in 2006 when wider access to digital cameras led to an upswing in covert filming (of women showering or 'upskirting', for example). Therefore, the definition is limited to these behaviours. But the law was drafted before later advances in smartphone technology, now owned by many more people than in 2006. Generally, laws are thought of as 'living documents', able to be read in line with the development of new or advanced technology. But when the legislation itself is drafted with certain technology or behaviours in mind, it is not necessarily future-proofed. Where to now? There is a risk to simply adding more offences to plug the gaps (and New Zealand is not alone in having to deal with this challenge). Amending the Crimes Act to include intimate audio recordings might address one issue. But new or advanced technologies will inevitably raise others. Rather than responding to each new form of abuse as it arises, it would be better to take a step back and develop a more principled, future-focused criminal law framework. That would mean defining offences in a technology-neutral way. Grounded in core values such as privacy, autonomy and consent, they would be more capable of adapting to new contexts and tools. Only then can the law provide meaningful protection against the evolving forms of gendered harm facilitated by digital technologies.
