ACT Welcomes Law Change To Tackle Benefit Dependency And Restore Accountability
'With ACT in Government, the free ride is over,' said Dr Parmar.
'We're ending the culture of no consequences and putting responsibility back at the centre of the welfare system. People who can work should work – and the taxpayers who fund the system deserve nothing less.
'The law introduces new non-financial sanctions within the existing Traffic Light System, targeting a persistent minority who are capable of working but refuse to engage.
'Beneficiaries who fail to take active steps toward employment can now face additional obligations – including electronic income management, mandatory job search activities and upskilling. Electronic income management limits spending to household essentials – a commitment ACT secured in the coalition agreement.
'Shifting people off the lifestyle of dependency, and back onto the path of productive work, is how we build better lives, boost economic growth, and break generational cycles of misery.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
4 hours ago
- 1News
Warning after real estate agents caught altering sale agreements
House buyers, particularly those using money from KiwiSaver, may be being put at risk by real estate agents altering sale and purchase agreements, the Law Association warns. The association's property law committee raised a concern with the Real Estate Institute after members noted real estate salespeople were altering agreements to waive buyers' title requisition rights. These gave buyers time to ensure the title was acceptable, even if an offer was unconditional. Changes were also being made to allow the early release of buyers' deposits to the vendors. Law Association president Tony Herring said it was not a widespread issue, but had been noted on a handful of agreements. He said if the title requisition right was unaltered and there was a problem with it, the purchaser had time to get the defect fixed or to back out of the deal if necessary. ADVERTISEMENT But if it was not, he said, buyers could be put in an impossible position. "There's not often defects on the title but it does happen, and it happened to me recently where there was a cross-leased title involving four different properties and there was an error on the title. "To get that fixed is very difficult and very costly and can take quite some time because you need to involve surveyors, banks." The purchaser's lawyer would have to alert the bank to the problem. "If there is a defect on the title, the bank will then say 'we are not going to advance the mortgage funds until you've fixed it'. In the meantime, the settlement date is coming up and the purchaser has to settle because they are in an unconditional situation, but they cannot raise the money from the bank. Therefore, it is catch-22." Herring said a standard sale and purchase agreement said the person holding the deposit, whether that was a salesperson or a lawyer, needed to hold it for 10 working days, which aligned with the title requisition period. Once that was over and the buyer's conditions were satisfied, it could be released. "If the deposit is released earlier than that and the vendor spends the deposit — maybe they use it for paying down debt, to put a deposit on a house they are buying or they might go overseas, if the requisition period is activated and the purchaser has to cancel the contract — if that deposit is gone, it makes it much more difficult to get back." ADVERTISEMENT Herring said, if someone was using KiwiSaver to pay a deposit, their lawyer had to give a legal undertaking to the provider that if anything went wrong and settlement did not go ahead, the money would be returned. But, if something happened and the money had disappeared, that would be much harder. "It heightens the risk for KiwiSaver first-home buyers." He said people who discovered a change had been made to an agreement they had signed should seek legal advice. Real Estate Authority (REA) chief executive Belinda Moffat said her organisation had provided general advice to the sector on the issue. "Section 123 of the Act requires agents to hold money received in respect of a transaction for 10 working days – unless both parties agree to an earlier release. Ultimately, this 10-day rule exists to protect consumers. If a vendor fails to settle, or an issue arises before settlement, if the deposit has already been released it could leave the purchaser with no security that their deposit can be recovered. "An early release of a deposit is only permitted by court order, or if each party to the transactions signs an authority agreeing to the early release. REA is concerned that some licensees and parties have sought to include an early release clause as an additional clause in the Sale and Purchase Agreement. "REA does not consider that an early release clause in the Sale and Purchase Agreement meets the purposes of the Act. Such clauses may undermine the consumer protection intent of section 123. Licensees should instead ensure parties give informed authority to early release." ADVERTISEMENT Moffat said she was not able to comment on the current status of any complaints. "We note further that whether there is a finding of breach of the conduct rules will depend on the facts of each case."
NZ Herald
13 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon condemns Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, says he's ‘lost the plot'
'I think Netanyahu has gone way too far. I think he has lost the plot. What we are seeing overnight, the attack on Gaza City, is utterly, utterly unacceptable,' he said. Luxon said the Israeli Prime Minister is 'not listening to the international community'. He said he had been 'consistent' in his language and said the current military actions was 'driving more human catastrophe across Gaza'. New Zealand had limited trade to Israel and connection there, but 'we have stood up for values'. Luxon reiterated that any attempt by Israel at annexation would likely breach international law. When he was pressed on the gravity of saying another leader had lost the plot, Luxon said: 'I am telling you what my personal view is.' 'As a human being, looking at the situation, that is how I feel about it.' Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was extremely critical of Netanyahu. Photo / Mark Mitchell Act leader David Seymour said it was up to the ICJ to decide about claims of genocide. 'They have said it may be likely, but they haven't said that it is. Unless Chris Hipkins knows something more than the ICJ, I am not sure,' he said. He questioned what you actually do about that. Seymour emphasised the Government was wanting to make a 'sane, sober' decision on the question of Palestinian statehood 'in full knowledge of the facts'. Labour's Hipkins said 'we have an obligation to prevent genocide, and I don't think you can do that if you don't name an unfolding genocide'. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese this week said Netanyahu was 'in denial'. 'I spoke with Prime Minister Netanyahu. He, again, reiterated to me what he has said publicly as well – which is to be in denial about the consequences that are occurring for innocent people," he told the ABC. According to the Times of Israel, Netanyahu on Sunday rejected allegations of a genocide, saying if Israel had wanted to commit genocide, 'it would have taken exactly one afternoon'. Over the weekend, following a meeting between Luxon and Albanese, the Prime Ministers said there was a 'catastrophic humanitarian situation' happening in Gaza. 'Any attempt by Israel to escalate hostilities, including by taking control of Gaza City, would be wrong, risk violating international law and exacerbate the human catastrophe already unfolding inside the Gaza Strip. We urge the Israeli Government to reconsider before it is too late.' On Monday, the Government announced it would formally weigh up New Zealand's position on the recognition of Palestine over the next month. A statement issued by several countries' Foreign Ministers over the weekend, including New Zealand's Winston Peters, rejected Israel's decision to launch a fresh military operation in Gaza. 'It will aggravate the catastrophic humanitarian situation, endanger the lives of the hostages and further risk the mass displacement of civilians. The plans that the Government of Israel has announced risk violating international humanitarian law. Any attempts at annexation or of settlement extension violate international law.' It said the countries were 'united in our commitment to the implementation of a negotiated two-state solution as the only way to guarantee that both Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side in peace, security, and dignity'. 'A political resolution based on a negotiated two-state solution requires the total demilitarisation of Hamas and its complete exclusion from any form of governance in the Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian Authority must have a central role.' Netanyahu told reporters on Monday that any decision by foreign leaders to recognise Palestine was 'rewarding terror', according to reports. 'It defies imagination or understanding how intelligent people around the world, including seasoned diplomats, government leaders, and respected journalists, fall for this absurdity.' He also said Israel's goal was not to occupy Gaza, but instead to 'free it from Hamas terrorists'. 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.
Otago Daily Times
16 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Real estate agents caught altering sale agreements
House buyers - particularly those using money from KiwiSaver - may be being put at risk by real estate agents altering sale and purchase agreements, the Law Association warns. The association's property law committee raised a concern with the Real Estate Institute after members noted real estate salespeople were altering agreements to waive buyers' title requisition rights. These give buyers time to ensure the title is acceptable, even if an offer is unconditional. Changes were also being made to allow the early release of buyers' deposits to the vendors. Law Association president Tony Herring said it was not a widespread issue, but had been noted on a handful of agreements. He said if the title requisition right was unaltered and there was a problem with it, the purchaser had time to get the defect fixed or to back out of the deal if necessary. But if it was not, he said, buyers could be put in an impossible position. "There's not often defects on the title but it does happen, and it happened to me recently where there was a cross-leased title involving four different properties and there was an error on the title. "To get that fixed is very difficult and very costly and can take quite some time because you need to involve surveyors, banks." The purchaser's lawyer would have to alert the bank to the problem. "If there is a defect on the title, the bank will then say 'we are not going to advance the mortgage funds until you've fixed it'. In the meantime the settlement date is coming up and the purchaser has to settle because they are in an unconditional situation, but they cannot raise the money from the bank. Therefore it is catch-22." Herring said a standard sale and purchase agreement said the person holding the deposit, whether that was a salesperson or a lawyer, needed to hold it for 10 working days, which aligned with the title requisition period. Once that was over and the buyer's conditions were satisfied, it could be released. "If the deposit is released earlier than that and the vendor spends the deposit - maybe they use it for paying down debt, to put a deposit on a house they are buying or they might go overseas, if the requisition period is activated and the purchaser has to cancel the contract - if that deposit is gone, it makes it much more difficult to get back." Herring said if someone was using KiwiSaver to pay a deposit, their lawyer had to give a legal undertaking to the provider that if anything went wrong and settlement did not go ahead, the money would be returned. But if something happened and the money had disappeared, that would be much harder. "It heightens the risk for KiwiSaver first-home buyers." He said people who discovered a change had been made to an agreement they had signed should seek legal advice. Real Estate Authority (REA) chief executive Belinda Moffat said her organisation had provided general advice to the sector on the issue. "Section 123 of the Act requires agents to hold money received in respect of a transaction for 10 working days - unless both parties agree to an earlier release. "Ultimately, this 10-day rule exists to protect consumers. If a vendor fails to settle, or an issue arises before settlement, if the deposit has already been released it could leave the purchaser with no security that their deposit can be recovered. "An early release of a deposit is only permitted by court order, or if each party to the transactions signs an authority agreeing to the early release. REA is concerned that some licensees and parties have sought to include an early release clause as an additional clause in the Sale and Purchase Agreement. "REA does not consider that an early release clause in the Sale and Purchase Agreement meets the purposes of the Act. Such clauses may undermine the consumer protection intent of section 123. Licensees should instead ensure parties give informed authority to early release." Moffat said she was not able to comment on the current status of any complaints. "We note further that whether there is a finding of breach of the conduct rules will depend on the facts of each case."
