National pins re-election hopes on economy
Photo:
RNZ / Nick Monro
Analysis:
Saturday's National Party conference set out an early 2026 challenge to voters - stick with what we've got or risk it on who-knows-what.
It's a line National used successfully in 2014 (remember Eminem-esque?), but that was a different National, and a different looking government.
At roughly the same point in that electoral cycle, National was polling in the late forties.
National in 2025 is struggling to get past the early thirties.
Labour has emerged as the party New Zealanders think has the best handle on the cost of living, according to the Ipsos Issues Monitor.
Of course, there is a long way to go yet.
The prime minister knows this, and is counting on sunnier economic fortunes this time next year.
But to borrow a well-worn Christopher Luxon phrase, the cost of living is the barnacle that won't get off the boat, and Luxon spent his speech - and much of the week leading up to it - trying to convince people that National, not Labour, is the steady hand on the tiller amid choppy global waters.
The government is at pains to say it can't control global events, although it spent a lot of time criticising the previous government for blaming global events.
The Trump administration's increased tariffs landed like a lead balloon on Friday, and prompted some late additions to the conference's run sheet.
In his speech, Luxon acknowledged the tariffs, but said New Zealand can't just "batten down the hatch" and hope for the best.
Trade minister Todd McClay took some time out of his rurals session to say he's already spoken to his US trade counterpart, and dispatched top trade diplomat Vangelis Vitalis to Washington. McClay will follow in the coming weeks.
Domestically, National is still blaming the previous government for the economic conditions it inherited, and pitching that it needs a second term to truly sort it out.
The party's putting a stake in the ground and saying next year's election will be all about the economy.
Last Monday's
10-minute sermon from the podium
, which set out the steps National had taken to address the cost of living, was a harbinger of what was to come at the weekend.
Inside the cavernous National Air Force Museum, Luxon told media New Zealanders would have a "very simple choice" at the next election:
"Do you trust the guys that actually crashed the economy and have no plan, or do you trust the guys in the government that's actually inherited a mess and is sorting it out and is making progress before that election?"
Luxon did not mention the other "guys in the government" on Saturday.
That's not unusual. This was, after all, a National Party event, full of National Party stump speeches.
The party's deputy Nicola Willis, however, gave Luxon a shout-out for the "energy" it takes to keep Winston Peters and David Seymour under control.
While joking he was targeting 100 percent of the vote in 2026, Luxon said after his speech that it was natural to disagree with his coalition partners, but they were aligned on the things that mattered.
National leader Christopher Luxon speaks at the party's annual conference.
Photo:
RNZ / Giles Dexter
National party supporters that RNZ spoke to were largely happy with how things were going, and how Luxon was keeping things in line.
"We are very co-ordinated, very co-ordinated. We respect each other's policies and respect each other's decisions," said one member.
"They're very aggressive people that he's in Parliament with, but he's handled it extremely well," said another.
"It's like you're the mother in the house, and you have to herd two cats, who do co-operate sometimes, and other times they've got other agendas. From a managerial point of view, I think he's doing excellently in the light of the type of political system we've got."
Some expressed wariness of what Peters would do next year, others sung from Luxon's songsheet that this was the maturity of MMP on display.
"It's taking some managing, but it's all good. It's what MMP is about."
"Everybody's looking at next year's election again, and obviously they want to get back in. So there's a bit of leverage, and nobody's got more experience at that than Winston."
They were also convinced the country was going in the right direction, and that Luxon was the right person to steer it there.
"We're starting to turn the corner. The last 18 months has been the clean-up job, and we're actually getting ready to turn the tank around now."
"It just takes time, and people have got to be patient. They're doing everything that they possibly can, it's just a timing issue. Everybody's impatient."
National's membership thinks the polls will firm in their favour as the public look more critically at the alternative.
A Labour Party bereft of policy, juggling the niche demands of the more extreme Greens and Te Pāti Māori.
Luxon wants the country to "say yes" to more. More mining, more infrastructure, more housing, more tourism, more growth.
Opening up more concessions on Department of Conservation land, and charging international visitors to visit some DOC sites is part of that "say yes" strategy.
Twenty to forty dollars is not a large sum to fork out for people who have paid thousands to come here, and it adds $62m to the conservation estate that New Zealanders won't have to pay for.
There are still some implementation issues to work through.
It remains to be seen whether New Zealanders will have to take a passport or bank statement to Cathedral Cove to get out of a fee.
It's a small change, and one the government did not campaign or consult the public on, or put in its latest quarterly plan.
There will be more to come as parties start to differentiate themselves and sound the election battle drums.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
2 hours ago
- 1News
Government forges ahead with foreshore and seabed law
The Government is forging ahead with plans to change the law governing New Zealand's foreshore and seabed, despite a Supreme Court ruling last year that appeared to undercut the rationale for the change. The proposed legislation stems from a clause in National's coalition deal with NZ First, which promised to revisit the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. That commitment was driven by fears that a 2023 Court of Appeal decision could have made it significantly easier for Māori groups to win recognition of customary rights over parts of the coastline. The Government introduced a bill to Parliament last year to prevent that, but it hit pause in December after the Supreme Court effectively overturned the earlier ruling. At the time, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith welcomed the development and said ministers would take time to reassess their plans. ADVERTISEMENT On Tuesday, Goldsmith confirmed to RNZ that Cabinet had agreed to press ahead with the law change regardless and to pass it before October. "Everybody in New Zealand has an interest in what goes on in the coastline, and we're trying our best to get that balance right." Goldsmith said he was not convinced that last year's Supreme Court ruling had set a high enough test for judging whether customary rights should be granted. "We've had a couple of cases that have been decided since then - which have shown almost 100% of the coastline and those areas being granted customary marine title - which confirmed to us that the Supreme Court test still didn't achieve the balance that we think the legislation set out to achieve." Asked whether he expected an upswell of protest, Goldsmith said that had been an earlier concern but: "time will tell". "There's been a wide variety of views, some in favour, some against, but we think this is the right thing to do." The legislation was one of the key objections raised by Ngāpuhi leaders last year when they walked out on a meeting with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in protest. ADVERTISEMENT More than 200 applications for customary marine title are making their way through the courts. Under the amendment bill, any court decisions issued after 25 July 2024, will need to be reconsidered. That would appear to cover seven cases, involving various iwi from around the country. "I understand their frustration over that," Goldsmith said. "But we believe it is very important to get this right, because it affects the whole of New Zealand." Goldsmith said the government had set aside about $15 million to cover the additional legal costs. The Marine and Coastal Area Act was originally passed by the National-led government in 2011, replacing the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership. The 2004 law, introduced by Helen Clark's Labour government, provoked widespread protest and led to the creation of the Māori Party, now known as Te Pāti Māori. National's 2011 replacement declared that no one owned the foreshore and seabed but allowed Māori groups to seek recognition of their rights - or "Customary Marine Title" - through the courts or in direct negotiations with the Crown. ADVERTISEMENT Customary title recognises exclusive Māori rights to parts of the foreshore and seabed, provided certain legal tests are met, including proving continuous and "exclusive" use of the area since 1840 without substantial interruption. The 2023 Court of Appeal ruling, however, declared that groups only needed to show they had enough control over the area that they could keep others from using it, and that situations where the law itself had prevented them from doing so could be ignored. The Supreme Court subsequently overturned that and said the Court of Appeal had taken an unduly narrow approach in its interpretation.
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
The people quietly preserving a place for cash
The Reserve Bank is doing its once-every-two-year survey to understand how New Zealanders use, store and spend cash. Photo: 123RF As Kiwis' cash use comes under scrutiny, shopkeepers and emergency savers are among those quietly preserving a place for physical currency. At present, the Reserve Bank is doing its once-every-two-year survey to understand how New Zealanders use, store and spend cash. Dunedin residents, unscientifically surveyed by RNZ on Tuesday, said they were using cash for everything from groceries to public transport, pocket money, cheese rolls and, in Sheryn Wilson's case, to give to the less fortunate. "Occasionally, I'll get out $20 in change and give it to my granddaughter to give to the people along here. That's basically all I use it for. To give the homeless... but that's it," Wilson said. Physical money remained second preference to using a bank card, although she believed it was worthwhile to have a backup stash for emergencies. "It feels strange now to use cash. It feels old-fashioned and kind of dirty," she said. Clive Cockle said he always carried cash but tended to default to swiping his card. He said he also kept at least a few dollars for emergencies. However Daniel, who did not want his last name identified, said he actively avoided cash to try to restrain his spending. "I find it hard to save money if I've got cash lying around - I'll just spend it straight away. If I've got cash, every time I open my wallet, it's gone," he said. Clive Cockle said he keeps at least a few dollars for emergencies. Photo: VNP / Daniela Maoate-Cox This year, the Reserve Bank's random postal survey would ask people how they preferred to pay, how often they used cash, how easy it was to deposit and withdraw coins and notes, and whether they stored cash - and why. Reserve Bank's cash manager Ian Woolford said people's habits were shifting. The last survey found fewer people using cash day-to-day, but those who did used it more often and more people said they valued it for privacy and safety. "The work that we're doing is to make sure that consumers - citizens - can use it when and as they please," he said. The Dairy and Business Owners Group said it was becoming harder for shopkeepers to manage cash. Chairperson Ankit Bansal said some people were relying on dairies for small cash withdrawals when there were not banks nearby. But the reduced number of bank branches and the increase in 'cashless' banks made it hard for shopkeepers to maintain a float. Bansal said stores needed easy bank access because holding money on site was a safety risk. "Banks - this is their job. Essentially we're seeing them picking and choosing what services they're providing. So I hope to see some action on the banks," he said. Retail New Zealand chief executive Carolyn Young said cash was on the way out, although not in the near future. Fewer than one in ten nationwide retail transactions were now in cash, she said. "It's certainly always diminishing, but how long that tail is, we're not sure," Young said. Shopkeepers were not supportive of New Zealand First's recent members' bill, which would require making it mandatory for stores to take cash for purchases up to $500, she said. "Retailers... understand that cash is important, but they don't want to be dictated - that it's mandated. Part of it is what do people want and how do we make sure that that's working. It's not broken at the moment. We don't think that it's necessary," Young said. Jamie Jermain, the co-founder of the SquareOne app that helps children understand finance and managing their money, found some children didn't know what cash was. He said a tool kit was needed to teach children about money and it's value when cash is increasingly invisible in a digital world. "In this day in age, what kids are getting more and more used to seeing is their parents essentially tapping this magic wand on a terminal. They [young people] don't have that connection with money, they don't see how it works on a day-to-day basis," Jermain said. Educating children on how to earn, save and responsibly spend money is crucial for learning good money habits when children get older, Jermain said. "Those lessons are with them for life," he said. The Reserve Bank's survey closes on 10 October. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Labelling rules ease for genetically-modified food made without new DNA added, amid reform
Food Safety Minister Andrew Hoggard. (File photo) Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver The appetite for food made with the use of gene technologies will be tested in New Zealand, amid ongoing regulatory reform and an easing of food labelling requirements. Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) approved updated definitions for genetically-modified (GM) food in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code in June for review, following public consultation. In late July, Food Safety Minister Andrew Hoggard and his Australian counterparts decided to adopt them. Food produced using new breeding techniques, including gene editing, will not need to be labelled as "GM" on the food label, if novel or new DNA was not introduced in the process. Simultaneously, the government was considering a new regulatory regime for gene technologies used outside the laboratory, after it attracted 15,000 submissions during select committee earlier this year. Minister Andrew Hoggard told RNZ last week, there was some vocal opposition to FSANZ's P1055 proposal during public consultation from those who "don't believe in [genetic engineering]." "There was still some vocal opposition, so that was taken onboard. Obviously, there was support from a lot of industry and scientific groups," he said. Andrew Hoggard said producers could still choose to disclose gene technologies to label it as such. (File photo) Photo: 123RF Hoggard said in removing the requirement, producers could still choose to disclose gene technologies used throughout production on the label. "There's nothing stopping anyone who is producing food that doesn't have any new breeding technologies to label it as such. We're not outlawing that people don't have to put these labels on." He said it came down to consumer's choice. "So if the organic sector, for example, doesn't want to allow these new breeding techniques in their production, then people who also think they don't want to consume food that's had new breeding techniques used in them, then they can just buy organic and know that 'okay, that hasn't been used'. "If this is something you're not worried about, then just go ahead shopping as normal," he said. "If it is something you are concerned about, producers who will be using the old methodologies will still be able to highlight on the packaging that, 'hey, we don't use the X, Y and Z' or 'we don't do this or that'. And you just need to go and look for that food." Hoggard said to the best of his knowledge, no health issues had been raised from the consumption of GMO products, like soya bean for example. Meanwhile, GE-Free New Zealand spokesperson Jon Carapiet said the eased labelling requirements took informed choices away from the consumer. GE-Free New Zealand spokesperson Jon Carapiet. Photo: RNZ "It's really fundamentally unethical to take away the ordinary consumer's choice in the supermarkets," Carapiet said. "It's all about trust, and to say 'we're not gonna even trust you to make your own decisions anymore'... is really wrong." He said the assertion that shoppers concerned about GM food would simply buy organic food instead was "disingenuous". "The average consumer certainly can't afford to go and buy organics on everyday basis. I wish they could, but they can't," he said. "So to say all the ordinary people of New Zealand don't deserve the right to choose, I think that's very wrong." Carapiet said supermarkets could ask their suppliers to disclose the use of gene technologies throughout production to ensure transparency and to inform shoppers about the product they were buying. "I think that in the coming months, if this does go ahead, companies will have to go above and beyond the food authority standards. "If the food authority FSANZ says 'no you can have GM crops and GE foods unlabelled in the supermarket', then it's going to be for the supermarkets to voluntarily label it." In a written statement, a Foodstuffs spokesperson said it took food safety "very seriously" and complied fully with the Australia and New Zealand Food Standards Code, including all labelling requirements. "Customers have the right to know what's in the food they're buying," they said. "As part of our supplier agreements, we require partners to disclose country of origin information, and any environmental or social claims must be accurate and substantiated." They said the same approach applied to food made using gene technologies, including GM ingredients. "Any changes to regulation in this space will be carefully reviewed, and we'll continue to ensure our labelling provides customers with accurate and transparent information, so they can make informed choices." A Woolworths New Zealand spokesperson said it will make sure its retail items complied with labelling rules. "If the labelling rules in New Zealand change then we would ensure all products comply with labelling requirements," they said. A government report on the Gene Technology Bill was expected on August 22. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
