Latest news with #Crown-owned
Otago Daily Times
12 hours ago
- Climate
- Otago Daily Times
What you might not know about insurance in a natural disaster
The Natural Hazards Commission is warning homeowners they are only covered for partial land damage under the Crown-owned insurer. A recent survey shows more than half (56%) of insured New Zealand homeowners expect full insurance compensation for natural hazard land damage. The Natural Hazards Commission (NHC) - which used to be called the EQC - said the national scheme provided up to $300,000 for house damage and some limited cover for damage to land. NHC chief executive Tina Mitchell said the land cover was standalone and could not be topped up with private insurance. "Land cover is specifically designed as a contribution payment, not full cover. "The limits of cover available ensures every homeowner across the country gets access to some protection, and helps keep the scheme affordable as it is funded by homeowners. People needed to understand there were limits to Crown-owned insurer scheme before a disaster occurred, Mitchell said. "When you understand that your landcover is limited, you can take action. "We recommend learning about the risks to your property and seeking expert advice from builders or engineers about how to protect your land from damage. For example, strengthening retaining walls and considering how waterways might impact your property are good things to check regularly. "If you do think your house is in a risky zone, you may want to allow for possible recovery costs in your financial planning. The scheme is a good contribution, but it is not designed to cover all costs." NHC's suggestions • Learn about the risks to the property and how the land might be affected. • Check the limits of cover for the house and the land. • Reduce risk by seeking expert advice from builders or engineers. • Plan for how to manage after an event. The commission's chief strategy officer, Michala Beacham, told RNZ's Morning Report programme today that properties were only covered for land damage within eight metres of the home, or 60 metres of the land needed to access the home. "It is a horribly stressful time dealing with a natural hazard event, it effects people homes, families and livelihoods, and then having an unexpected cost on top of that is really, you know, not a good time for anyone. "So that's why we are just trying to help people understand beforehand." Beacham said settlements for land were based on the cost of repair - within eight metres of the home - or the value of the land damage, but said under legislation NHC paid whatever was less. "So if your cost of repair is greater than the value of the land then you are going to face a shortfall... A number of people do find themselves with less than they expected or less than they might otherwise need to make a repair."
The Advertiser
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Advertiser
Pressure on UK monarchy over historical ties to slavery
New research shows Britain's King George IV, who ruled for a decade until 1830, personally profited from enslaved labour on Grenadian plantations, a finding experts say heightens pressure on the monarchy to confront its historical links to slavery. Independent scholar Desirée Baptiste uncovered a 1823-24 document at the National Archives in London revealing a STG1000 ($A2049) payment - equivalent to around STG103,132 today - from two Crown-owned estates in Grenada where hundreds of enslaved people laboured in the 18th and 19th centuries. The funds were paid into King George IV's private coffers, and contributed to his "lavish lifestyle", said Baptiste, a researcher on colonialism and transatlantic slavery who has roots in Grenada. Baptiste's research was verified by University of Manchester professor Edmond Smith and Dr Nick Draper, founder of University College London's Legacies of British Slave-ownership project. Prof Smith, who is supervising a PhD study on the royal family's role in slavery, said as more evidence is uncovered the monarchy's profits from slavery will become clearer. He said this payment "might well just be the tip of the iceberg". Buckingham Palace did not immediately respond to a request for comment. King Charles has backed the study led by Smith, following a 2023 Guardian report revealing that in 1689 King William III received STG1000 in shares in the Royal African Company, which trafficked thousands of enslaved Africans to the Americas. "This evidence fits with long-term patterns of colonial exploitation by the British royal family, including repeated efforts to find novel income streams from colonies in the Caribbean," Smith said. King Charles expressed sorrow over slavery in a speech to Commonwealth leaders in 2022. But Baptiste said no British monarch has publicly acknowledged the Crown once owned and profited from enslaved people in the Caribbean. Baptiste's research, from her independent study Slaves the Property of His Majesty: George IV and Grenada, comes amid growing global momentum for reparations for slavery, especially across the Caribbean and Africa. However, some European leaders have been accused of being opposed to even opening the conversation. New research shows Britain's King George IV, who ruled for a decade until 1830, personally profited from enslaved labour on Grenadian plantations, a finding experts say heightens pressure on the monarchy to confront its historical links to slavery. Independent scholar Desirée Baptiste uncovered a 1823-24 document at the National Archives in London revealing a STG1000 ($A2049) payment - equivalent to around STG103,132 today - from two Crown-owned estates in Grenada where hundreds of enslaved people laboured in the 18th and 19th centuries. The funds were paid into King George IV's private coffers, and contributed to his "lavish lifestyle", said Baptiste, a researcher on colonialism and transatlantic slavery who has roots in Grenada. Baptiste's research was verified by University of Manchester professor Edmond Smith and Dr Nick Draper, founder of University College London's Legacies of British Slave-ownership project. Prof Smith, who is supervising a PhD study on the royal family's role in slavery, said as more evidence is uncovered the monarchy's profits from slavery will become clearer. He said this payment "might well just be the tip of the iceberg". Buckingham Palace did not immediately respond to a request for comment. King Charles has backed the study led by Smith, following a 2023 Guardian report revealing that in 1689 King William III received STG1000 in shares in the Royal African Company, which trafficked thousands of enslaved Africans to the Americas. "This evidence fits with long-term patterns of colonial exploitation by the British royal family, including repeated efforts to find novel income streams from colonies in the Caribbean," Smith said. King Charles expressed sorrow over slavery in a speech to Commonwealth leaders in 2022. But Baptiste said no British monarch has publicly acknowledged the Crown once owned and profited from enslaved people in the Caribbean. Baptiste's research, from her independent study Slaves the Property of His Majesty: George IV and Grenada, comes amid growing global momentum for reparations for slavery, especially across the Caribbean and Africa. However, some European leaders have been accused of being opposed to even opening the conversation. New research shows Britain's King George IV, who ruled for a decade until 1830, personally profited from enslaved labour on Grenadian plantations, a finding experts say heightens pressure on the monarchy to confront its historical links to slavery. Independent scholar Desirée Baptiste uncovered a 1823-24 document at the National Archives in London revealing a STG1000 ($A2049) payment - equivalent to around STG103,132 today - from two Crown-owned estates in Grenada where hundreds of enslaved people laboured in the 18th and 19th centuries. The funds were paid into King George IV's private coffers, and contributed to his "lavish lifestyle", said Baptiste, a researcher on colonialism and transatlantic slavery who has roots in Grenada. Baptiste's research was verified by University of Manchester professor Edmond Smith and Dr Nick Draper, founder of University College London's Legacies of British Slave-ownership project. Prof Smith, who is supervising a PhD study on the royal family's role in slavery, said as more evidence is uncovered the monarchy's profits from slavery will become clearer. He said this payment "might well just be the tip of the iceberg". Buckingham Palace did not immediately respond to a request for comment. King Charles has backed the study led by Smith, following a 2023 Guardian report revealing that in 1689 King William III received STG1000 in shares in the Royal African Company, which trafficked thousands of enslaved Africans to the Americas. "This evidence fits with long-term patterns of colonial exploitation by the British royal family, including repeated efforts to find novel income streams from colonies in the Caribbean," Smith said. King Charles expressed sorrow over slavery in a speech to Commonwealth leaders in 2022. But Baptiste said no British monarch has publicly acknowledged the Crown once owned and profited from enslaved people in the Caribbean. Baptiste's research, from her independent study Slaves the Property of His Majesty: George IV and Grenada, comes amid growing global momentum for reparations for slavery, especially across the Caribbean and Africa. However, some European leaders have been accused of being opposed to even opening the conversation. New research shows Britain's King George IV, who ruled for a decade until 1830, personally profited from enslaved labour on Grenadian plantations, a finding experts say heightens pressure on the monarchy to confront its historical links to slavery. Independent scholar Desirée Baptiste uncovered a 1823-24 document at the National Archives in London revealing a STG1000 ($A2049) payment - equivalent to around STG103,132 today - from two Crown-owned estates in Grenada where hundreds of enslaved people laboured in the 18th and 19th centuries. The funds were paid into King George IV's private coffers, and contributed to his "lavish lifestyle", said Baptiste, a researcher on colonialism and transatlantic slavery who has roots in Grenada. Baptiste's research was verified by University of Manchester professor Edmond Smith and Dr Nick Draper, founder of University College London's Legacies of British Slave-ownership project. Prof Smith, who is supervising a PhD study on the royal family's role in slavery, said as more evidence is uncovered the monarchy's profits from slavery will become clearer. He said this payment "might well just be the tip of the iceberg". Buckingham Palace did not immediately respond to a request for comment. King Charles has backed the study led by Smith, following a 2023 Guardian report revealing that in 1689 King William III received STG1000 in shares in the Royal African Company, which trafficked thousands of enslaved Africans to the Americas. "This evidence fits with long-term patterns of colonial exploitation by the British royal family, including repeated efforts to find novel income streams from colonies in the Caribbean," Smith said. King Charles expressed sorrow over slavery in a speech to Commonwealth leaders in 2022. But Baptiste said no British monarch has publicly acknowledged the Crown once owned and profited from enslaved people in the Caribbean. Baptiste's research, from her independent study Slaves the Property of His Majesty: George IV and Grenada, comes amid growing global momentum for reparations for slavery, especially across the Caribbean and Africa. However, some European leaders have been accused of being opposed to even opening the conversation.
Scoop
31-07-2025
- Business
- Scoop
NZ Reopens For Petroleum Exploration
Operators will be able to apply for new petroleum exploration permits as early as September following the third reading of the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. The Bill removes the ban on oil and gas exploration beyond onshore Taranaki, better aligns decommissioning settings with international practice, establishes a new tier of permit to undertake small-scale non-commercial gold mining, and signals the Coalition Government's intent to reinvigorate investment in Crown-owned minerals. 'This Government is pragmatic about the vital role natural gas will play in our energy mix in the decades ahead and we have set a course for greater energy security backed by our own indigenous reserves,' Mr Jones says. 'The ill-fated exploration ban in 2018 has exacerbated shortages in our domestic gas supply by obliterating new investment in the exploration and development needed to meet our future gas needs. Reserves are also falling faster than anticipated. 'New Zealanders are bearing the brunt of this constrained gas supply, and energy security concerns are impacting investor sentiment. These factors are taking a toll on our economic growth and prosperity. 'We are seeing businesses in the regions closing as a result with Kiwis losing their jobs, and we're importing hundreds of tonnes of Indonesian coal to meet peak energy demand. 'This legislation is just one of many actions we are taking to get the right settings in place to resuscitate sector confidence, shore up energy supply and protect electricity affordability.' During the progression of the Bill, a gap was identified in the existing Crown Minerals Act that relates to liability for the costs of decommissioning petroleum infrastructure. In certain circumstances, parent companies of permit-holders could sell their shares without remaining responsible for the costs of decommissioning old petroleum infrastructure, exposing the Crown to fiscal risk. 'Together with changes to the decommissioning regime that better balance regulatory burden and risk to give operators the clarity they need to invest in exploration and development wells, we have introduced ministerial discretion to assign liability for decommissioning costs to former permit-holders and others who have held interests in a permit,' Mr Jones says. 'We recognise that a one-size-fits-all approach for every scenario not only erodes investor confidence, it also doesn't allow us to best manage risk. 'I want those who benefited from having an interest in a petroleum permit to pay for decommissioning the relevant infrastructure. While financial securities remain at the core, the new approach to assigning liability will ensure the most appropriate person will remain responsible for costs if the current permit-holder cannot meet their obligations and financial securities are insufficient.' Most of the changes through the Bill will take effect immediately, while others will require staged implementation and secondary legislation. All changes will be operational by the end of September 2025.
Winnipeg Free Press
18-07-2025
- Business
- Winnipeg Free Press
Manitoba Hydro plus growing debt: a bad equation
Opinion Manitoba Hydro's PUB filing raises new questions about the utility's financial sustainability with big implications for ratepayers and taxpayers. Hydro's forecast calls for annual rate hikes of 3.5 per cent, or a 40 per cent increase over the next 10 years. Even if these rates happen and there is no guarantee, given the current government's populist predilection towards pawning the 'crown jewel' of the province for immediate political cash, Hydro will not generate enough funds to support its business. Instead, to pay for refurbishment projects and for a small amount of new capacity, Hydro will try to increase its debt load by a further $8.6 billion. And this is a best-case scenario, given the likely occurrence of one more low-water level year (four of the past five), interest spikes, export price drops or the high probability of major projects exceeding budget. WINNIPEG FREE PRESS ILLUSTRATION Is Manitoba Hydro coming to the end of the financial line? Hydo acknowledges its precarious starting position stating 'there is no room left to allow material increases to the debt ratio while maintaining the financial health of the utility.' Only one other Crown utility could say this, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, before it received a more than $5-billion bailout from the federal government in 2021. It is also an understatement. At nearly $1 billion, Hydro's yearly interest payments now consume 35 cents of every dollar on your Hydro bill, far in excess of the average of seven cents across other North American utilities, private or Crown-owned. How did this happen? Foremost is Hydro's record of grossly inefficient capital spending. Over a 20-year span beginning in 2014, Hydro's debt-financed asset base will increase by 250 per cent, or nearly $20 billion, but will produce only 20 per cent more energy capacity. The Keeyask generating station and Bipole III — the latter which was primarily needed for transmission capacity but misleadingly justified on the basis of risk mitigation — are the main reasons. They created $12 billion in new debt but not enough new revenue to even cover the interest payments while starving Hydro of the scarce capital and people that should have been invested in rebuilding end-of -life core infrastructure. A planned 600 megawatts of private wind generation is excluded because even though it will create a sizable, debt-like expense, it is an intermittent energy source with minimal 'always on' contribution to our peak winter energy. And at the end of this period Hydro will still have significant, aged infrastructure. Second is Manitoba's poor performance managing energy demand to reduce the size and to extend the need date of expensive, new energy. The goal under Hydro's old Power Smart program was to reduce domestic peak load by 1,100 megawatts before 2028. In today's dollars, achieving half this target puts Manitoba in line with efficiency measures in other jurisdictions and is worth a $7-billion hydro generating station. Inexcusably, no measurable progress on peak load was made by Hydro. When Efficiency Manitoba took over in 2020, it ignored energy capacity altogether in favour of overall savings, whether or not achieved during times of the year or day when there is abundant or scarce capacity, and which have also fallen short of target every year. Last but not least are Hydro's burgeoning administration costs. Over the five years since 2022 wages and salaries will have grown by over 30 per cent, far outstripping revenue increases. This is due to contract settlements and wage bracket inflation of 3.5 to five per cent per year and hundreds of added employees, including 200 hires to satisfy a recent agreement with the IEBW. With almost 1,000 employees or nearly 20 per cent of its workforce, now earning over $150,000 per year, Hydro can be viewed as an important employer of highly skilled individuals in our province but fairly criticized for being untethered to effective productivity measures to assess the value of these positions. The consequences to Manitobans are real. In late 2022, the prior government reduced fees paid by Hydro to the province by $190 million per year on the basis of being excessive compared to other jurisdictions. The current government has gone further, cutting Hydro's capital taxes and debt guarantee fees worth more than $250 million annually. This is not justified on any basis, other than as an outright subsidy from Manitoba taxpayers to Hydro ratepayers at a cost of $5 billion over the next 20 years. Hydro's high and rising debt, large financial support from the province, low revenues due to politically suppressed rates, lack of board independence from government and massive downside risk tied to water levels will attract the attention of others, notably debt rating agencies like Moody's and DBRS and the provinces of B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan whose taxpayers contribute billions into equalization payments made to Manitoba each year. In its PUB filing, Hydro highlights the risk of no longer being viewed as a self-supporting entity by DBRS. On their criteria noted above, it seems clear Hydro already fails the test or is on the razor's edge of doing so. If this happens Hydro, will be considered dependent and its obligations will be added to the province's, doubling our per capita debt overnight, leading to a credit downgrade and higher interest costs for the province and Hydro, potentially in hundreds of millions of dollars. On the equalization front, the case for adjusting Manitoba's own source revenue upward and payments from Ottawa downward will be much more convincingly made by the Western provinces based on Manitoba's near elimination of normal fee revenues from Hydro and its insistence on keeping Hydro rates below required levels. The math alone, shocking as it may to Manitobans who believed the low-cost energy narrative of every government for the past 20 years, shows that 3.5 per cent annual increases are insufficient. Rates will have to go up more and they should be paid for by those who consume the most energy and who can afford it, for example larger residences, larger businesses and major industrial users. This is done in other jurisdictions to varying degrees and needs to start yesterday in Manitoba — likewise, demand management and usage incentives that will curtail our peak power use. Higher rates will not cause any large employer to leave the province just as lower rates have not attracted a single large employer, despite the hype and promise, over the past 40 years. Higher rates will, finally, begin to price our energy for what it is, a scarce resource that must be conserved through efficiency and green energy initiatives that haven't been cost justified because of our low power bills. Early in my short tenure as chair of Manitoba Hydro, I connected with board members of other Crown and state-owned utilities looking for advice and a sanity check on the upside-down governance practices I encountered. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. While I was not left reassured things would get better, I was guided by the perspective of a former CEO of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the largest government-owned utility in the U.S. Before our first conversation, he had read The Manitoba Hydro Act and said I should do the same to get grounded on Hydro's core purpose, which was to provide for the continuance of a supply of power to Manitobans in an economic and efficient manner. When one considers the fiscal mess Hydro faces today it is not hard to imagine how much could have been avoided if mandate letters from past successive governments had adhered to the Hydro Act and the inherent priorities of financial sustainability, operational excellence and effective capital deployment. The current PUB filing emphatically tells us there is no time or money left for more political adventures or overreach. It should be a clarion call for governance reform starting with a professional, highly competent and independent board, rather than well-intentioned, partisan individuals with limited authority and financial expertise and zero experience overseeing a complex, multibillion-dollar utility. Of all the seemingly intractable policy areas facing our provincial government, this single change is surely one of the most achievable and with the most potential to mitigate against the heightened risk of a financial calamity. Edward Kennedy is a former chairman of the board of Manitoba Hydro.
Hamilton Spectator
16-07-2025
- Business
- Hamilton Spectator
Survey suggests some Manitobans support higher hydro rates and appliance use at night
WINNIPEG - Some Manitobans appear willing to pay higher electricity rates and shift their energy use to nighttime, an opinion poll commissioned by Crown-owned Manitoba Hydro suggests. The findings come as the utility is asking the provincial regulator to approve rate increases in each of three next three years in order to replace aging infrastructure, avoid an increase in power outages and bring new generating power online. 'The study found that overall, a majority ... say Manitoba Hydro should make the necessary investments to maintain reliability even if it would increase the average monthly bill,' a document filed this month with the Public Utilities Board reads. The survey, conducted by Innovative Research Group in February and filed with the board last week, asked respondents whether they would be willing to pay a certain amount more on their monthly bill to avoid more or longer power outages. Respondents were presented with one of three monthly amounts — $6, $9 and $12. Almost two-thirds of those given the $6 option agreed with the idea of Manitoba Hydro spending more to maintain reliability even if it meant a higher monthly bill. That support dropped to 49 per cent for those presented the $12 a month scenario. Respondents were also polled on the possibility of paying different rates at different times of the day in order to persuade people to avoid using power at times of peak demand. Some energy utilities in Ontario already have such a system. More than half of respondents said they would either definitely or probably consider switching to nighttime use if it meant a lower rate for a number of items — running a dishwasher, charging an electric vehicle, using a washer and dryer, or taking a bath or shower. Fewer than half said they would run heating or air conditioning or cook meals more often at night to take advantage of lower rates. The online survey of 1,260 Manitobans was conducted between Feb. 4 and 17. Because the online survey was not a random probability-based sampling, it cannot be assigned a margin of error. Manitoba Hydro has long said it needs more money to prepare for the future and is asking the regulator to approve three annual rate hikes of 3.5 per cent starting next year. In its initial application package in March, the utility said it must spend $31 billion over two decades to maintain and improve existing infrastructure and expand generating capacity. Much of the infrastructure along the Bipole I and Bipole II transmission lines, which carry the bulk of the province's electricity from northern generating stations, is more than 50 years old and past the expected service life, the utility said. The utility has been laying the groundwork to modernize the lines since at least 2022. Manitoba Hydro is also planning to partner with Indigenous-led groups for 600 megawatts of new wind energy. The utility has said it could need new generating power as early as 2029 to meet growing demand. The Manitoba Eco-Network, a non-profit environmental group, said efforts to conserve energy could be more effective than building more power generation in keeping rates down. The group said it plans to question at hearings in the coming months why Manitoba Hydro recently signed export agreements with Saskatchewan and Minnesota utilities at a time when new generating power will soon be needed. 'It seems strange to me that they were entering into these export arrangements when we're also saying that we need that power,' executive director James Beddome said. The Consumers Coalition, which represents four non-profit groups including the Manitoba branch of the Consumers' Association of Canada, plans to press Manitoba Hydro on efforts to control costs in order to keep rates affordable. 'They'll ... be looking for Manitoba Hydro to be keeping things under control inside its own house,' Chris Klassen, a lawyer with the Public Interest Law Centre who represents the coalition, said. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 16, 2025 Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
