NZCTU Release Detailed Budget 2025 Analysis
Press Release – NZCTU
This Budget is funded above all by the gutting of the pay equity system, the halving of the governments contribution to peoples Kiwisaver accounts, and other cuts that will disproportionality impact women, welfare recipients, and working households, …
The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi has today released a report with detailed analysis of Budget 2025. It covers the major decisions made at this Budget, and how they might affect workers.
'This Budget is funded above all by the gutting of the pay equity system, the halving of the government's contribution to people's Kiwisaver accounts, and other cuts that will disproportionality impact women, welfare recipients, and working households,' said NZCTU Economist Craig Renney.
'None of the choices the government has made were inevitable. The government could have funded its spending initiatives by raising new taxes on the wealthiest New Zealanders. It could have not decided to give billions away to those who already have much, while cutting services for those with real and pressing needs.
'Budget 2025 also leaves New Zealand's most significant structural challenges unaddressed. There is no meaningful movement on closing the infrastructure deficit; no solution to our health workforce shortage; no willingness to reduce child poverty or to address the housing crisis; and absolutely zero investment made in decarbonisation and climate adaptation.
'The coalition government continues to kick the can down the road on the most pressing challenges we face, all while making life steadily more difficult for New Zealanders who have the least,' said Renney.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Manawatū Tararua Highway Should Open As A Toll Road
The opening of Te Ahu a Turanga: Manawatū Tararua Highway is a significant milestone for the lower North Island, with safety and travel times both set to improve. However, the decision not to toll the route is disappointing, says Infrastructure New Zealand. 'Not tolling the Manawatū Tararua Highway is a missed opportunity to help fund the ongoing maintenance and future resilience of this critical transport route through a 'user pays' approach,' says Chief Executive Nick Leggett. 'Tolling a new highway isn't about penalising the users of that road or the communities in the area. It's about being honest about the ongoing costs required to ensure the responsible management of the asset and ensuring that those who benefit from the road are making a direct contribution to its delivery and maintenance.' 'New Zealand's problem is that nobody thinks about maintaining a new road when it's nice and new, other than those who are responsible for building it. Those people don't control the money, though.' 'New infrastructure such as the Manawatū Tararua Highway comes with significant ongoing costs. Choosing not to use tolling doesn't make those costs disappear, it simply shifts the burden onto all New Zealand road users, including those who will never use the road,' Leggett says. 'If we want high-quality, modern infrastructure that is well maintained and resilient, we need to be smarter in how we manage and fund it. Having an annual amount of money generated from the road, means that New Zealanders can transparently follow that the money goes back into maintaining the road which generates it.' 'Tolling is one of the few tools we have that can directly link use with funding. It also helps protect the sustainability of the National Land Transport Fund so further investments can be made in critical transport projects into the future.' 'We need to be more inventive with how we fund and maintain infrastructure. Nothing should get off the ground without pricing road usage properly,' Leggett says. 'If New Zealand wants better infrastructure, it's going to need to do things differently at every stage of design, build and operations. That includes funding through tolls.'
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Should I contribute to KiwiSaver or pay mortgage faster? Ask Susan
The short answer is it depends. Photo: RNZ I was wondering, is it better to invest more in your KiwiSaver or into your mortgage? We are lucky and have a little bit of extra cash every pay, so we have been making additional mortgage repayments. With the upcoming changes to KiwiSaver, we won't be able to continue to do this if we don't opt out. What is the better option? My thinking is the lower the mortgage, the less interest we pay, which would see us better off in the long term. Fisher Funds Kiwisaver general manager David Boyle says he has received questions like this over the years and the answer is: "it depends". "It's hard to know, without knowing the total financial position and how long they've got until they retire," he said. "Paying more off your mortgage and contributing to KiwiSaver are both smart choices, if you find yourself with a bit of money leftover before payday. "To help with this here are some things they should consider if they keep paying a bit more off the mortgage." It's probably worth talking to a financial adviser about this. If you opt to focus on paying your mortgage faster, you might need a plan to get you on track for retirement, once that loan is gone. The increase to contributions of 4 percent is stepped over the next couple of years. Are you likely to receive a pay rise over that period that will help you continue paying a bit off your mortgage, as well as contribute a bit more? You also have the option to temporarily lower your contribution rate back to 3 percent if you want. I am the epitome of being a victim of the government's totally unfair direct deduction policy. I should have started receiving my richly deserved superannuation when I qualified for it 9.5 years ago and the Winter Energy Payments seven years ago when they began. Consequently, over $300,000 has been stolen from me and I live in abject poverty as a result. I am a dual citizen from America. I have lived here 19.5 years, so on what legal basis has the government for denying the WEPs? Its written explanation is that it would be difficult to administer to NZ seniors not currently receiving a government benefit such as superannuation. That is mind boggling and I hope you see fit to write about this outrageous treatment of nearly 100,000 Kiwi seniors. Sorry, yes, I've checked with the ministry and it confirms that people who are not getting NZ Super because of an overseas pension cannot get the Winter Energy Payment. Generally, if your NZ Super entitlement has been eliminated by your overseas pension, it's because what you receive from overseas is more than the NZ Super payment. Send your questions to Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Otago Daily Times
10 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Scraping the bottom of the barrel
Just when you think things can't get any worse, they often do. That is precisely what we have seen politically this week when it comes to the behaviour of our politicians. As if Leader of the House Chris Bishop's ill-conceived and poorly controlled ramblings at the Aotearoa Music Awards about a Stan Walker performance featuring Toitū Te Tiriti banners and people waving tino rangatiratanga flags weren't enough, the country had to endure even ghastlier behaviour in Parliament on Thursday. The debate about whether to endorse the recommendation to suspend three Te Pāti Māori MPs really showed New Zealanders the worst of Parliament. Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, and Rawiri Waititi have now been barred from the House for seven days, 21 days and 21 days respectively for performing a haka in Parliament during debate last November about the waste of time, energy and money that was the Act party's contentious Treaty Principles Bill. Their intimidatory behaviour towards Act MPs then was at the core of the complaints considered by the Privileges Committee. Despite efforts by Opposition parties to reduce the length of the recommended suspensions, the government on Thursday ratified the committee's recommendations for punishments which, in the case of Ms Ngarewa-Packer and Mr Waititi, are the most severe ever handed down to MPs. While there can be little doubt that the behaviour of the three MPs last November was threatening and failed to meet the standards of Parliament, the severity seems unnecessarily vindictive. Interestingly, an RNZ poll of just over 1000 people, with a margin of error of 3.1 %, now shows that most respondents – 37% – think the punishment is 'about right" while 36.2% consider it too harsh. It is 'too lenient" in the minds of 17.2% of those surveyed. Of Labour Party supporters, 8% believe it should have been tougher, as do 3.8% of Green Party followers and, surprisingly, 9% of Te Pāti Māori supporters. The poll shows 54.2% of respondents either support the penalties or think they were too weak, a reflection of the government's view. While the impromptu haka by the three was seen by some as unacceptable and a breach of parliamentary protocol, it was Ms Ngarewa-Packer's foolish mimicry of shooting Act MPs which was the worst and most intimidatory action that day. The second she put her two fingers together, made the pretend gun and pointed it at Act leader David Seymour and colleagues marked the start of this whole sorry saga – though of course it can also be argued the real start came with the introduction of Mr Seymour's divisive Bill, allowed to happen by a prime minister too focused on stitching up a coalition deal with him at the top. The inciting incidents, the response and the reactions this week leave a stain on the reputation of Parliament. Some of the grandiloquence in the House on Thursday was vituperative and unwarranted. NZ First leader Winston Peters went way too far when he likened Mr Waititi's moko to scribbles, though he did apologise after the Speaker's intervention. Mr Waititi also stepped over the line by bringing a noose into the House. It was a bit rich for Mr Peters to tell RNZ it was a sad day in Parliament when he played a significant role in making it that. Parliament is no place for shrinking violets. We have seen that time and time again. It has had more than its share of biffo and nastiness over the years, which never led to suspensions anywhere near the length of those rubberstamped this week. Let us hope we don't see the like of this miserable drama again. Saw that coming It was always going to be a case of 'this town ain't big enough for the both of us". The implosion in recent days of United States President Donald Trump's simpering friendship with Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has been both highly predictable and highly amusing. Mr Musk has become increasingly caustic and is now calling for Mr Trump to be impeached. In turn, the president wants all Mr Musk's government contracts to be cancelled. When two such massive egos meet, there can only be one winner. Who that will ultimately be remains to be seen. In the meantime, let's be honest, the feud provides some much-needed light relief.
