National's Pathetic Nanny-State Policy Tweaks

Many politicians within the current National-led coalition government have spent much of their careers railing against the supposed "Nanny State" excesses of Labour’s past, particularly of the Helen Clark era. They used to accuse Clark’s Fifth Labour Government of suffocating New Zealanders with overbearing regulations and paternalistic policies, such as requiring power saving light bulbs and water saving shower heads. Yet, in a twist of irony sharper than a shearing blade, this self-proclaimed coalition of freedom has unveiled a raft of petty and pointless rules that would make even the most zealous bureaucrat blush.

From dictating when school kids can use cellphones or protest against climate inaction to taking control of beneficiaries payments to meddling in farmyard chores to tightening the screws on election booth treats to banning transgender people from using toilets, and now dictating how businesses handle pay-wave surcharges, the coalition of chaos is proving itself the true practitioners of the Nanny Statism they once decried.


On Wednesday, RNZ reported:

Chores young people can do on a farm changing

The agriculture sector will be consulted on proposed changes to risk regulations on what chores young people can safely carry out on the family farm.

Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden said it will consult on these thresholds, like collecting eggs or feeding small animals, while ensuring safety is not compromised.

Minister van Velden said children will be able to do more complex tasks with supervision and training as they get older - but expects higher-risk activities like being near heavy machinery to remain off-limits.

Labour’s Chris Hipkins rightly criticised the coalition’s bizarre consultation on what chores children can do on family farms, calling it a solution in search of a problem. The National-led government, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that the age-old tradition of kids mucking in on the family farm requires a regulatory overhaul. Apparently, the coalition believes that rural parents need Wellington’s guiding hand to decide whether their teenager can feed the chooks.

This is the same National Party that once lambasted Helen Clark’s government for its "Helengrad" type controlling tendencies, accusing Labour of infantilising New Zealanders with rules like the "anti-smacking law" However here they are, drafting a rulebook for farmyard tasks that’s as patronising as it is pointless. The irony is thicker than a mud patch: National, the party of personal responsibility, now wants to nanny rural families into compliance.

Then there’s the coalition’s obsession with election booth "treating." The Electoral Act 1993 already bans providing free food, drink, or entertainment to sway voters, but apparently that wasn’t nanny state enough for National. They've now doubled down with a new rule slapping a 100-meter buffer zone around polling stations, again outlawing sausage sizzles or lolly scrambles on election day as if a free Raspberry Drop could topple democracy. It’s a petty tweak to an existing law, dressed up as a bold stand against voter bribery, yet it’s exactly the kind of bureaucratic meddling National once sneered at Labour for. One can only imagine the scandal: a hangi or a lolly scramble swaying the vote in a marginal electorate! This is particularly ridiculous when you consider how the coalition of chaos is desperately trying to tilt the next election in their favour by taking away people's right to register to vote on election day, which will disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders from participating in democracy.

This is the same coalition of political parties that once sneered at Labour’s supposed overreach, accusing Clark’s government of stifling free expression and community spirit. The hypocrisy is staggering. National once decried Labour’s "nanny state" for restricting individual freedoms, but apparently, a cuppa or sticker at the polling booth is a threat to democracy itself.

And then there’s the pathetic pay-wave surcharge saga, an exercise in futility dressed up as cost-of-living relief. The National-led government proudly announced a ban on surcharges for contactless payments, trumpeting it as a win for struggling consumers. They claimed it would save Kiwis money at the checkout, painting it as a bold strike against sneaky fees. But in a classic bait-and-switch, the coalition later quietly advised businesses to simply bake these fees into their overall prices. So, instead of reducing costs, the ban just shifts the burden to people who bother to punch in their numbers, potentially increasing prices across the board for everyone, whether they pay by card or cash. This isn’t relief; it’s a sleight of hand. Just like their promises of tax relief, National’s latest “solution” to the cost-of-living crisis looks more like a bureaucratic shuffle, forcing businesses to navigate new pricing rules while consumers foot the bill.

Retailers & hospitality have said they will add the surcharge to the price of the goods & services. Without capping what the credit card companies (banks) can charge the business, Luxon's claims are duplicitous. All people will in fact pay more, not just those using a credit card https://t.co/TVXXSNDGW8

— Maxine Gay (@GayMaxine) July 29, 2025

This coalition of chaos, as it’s been aptly dubbed, seems determined to outdo by a country mile the very "Helengrad" caricature it once created and weaponised. The National-led government’s fixation on micro-managing everyday life, whether it’s kids doing chores, people using toilets or paywave surcharges, reveals a governing philosophy that’s less about liberty and more about grabbing headlines with pointless gimmicks.

However, their micromanaging isn't always trivial. They’ve also axed Labour’s world-leading smokefree legislation, a policy designed to shield future generations from tobacco’s deadly grip, all while claiming it’s about slashing red tape. This reckless repeal, scrapping measures like denicotinisation and limits on cigarette sales, hands Big Tobacco hundreds of millions in taxpayer-funded profits, betraying Kiwis’ health for corporate gain. National’s pious rants against Labour’s “nanny state” ring hollow when they’re selling out young people's future to the tobacco giants, one puff at a time.
 

On Wednesday, the NZ Herald reported:

 

Government extends tax break for Philip Morris heated tobacco products

Verrall said the onus should be on Philip Morris to prove its product was safe.

“There is no reason why the government should be running a study for Philip Morris to help get its products used,” she said. “This product is not a health product. It is a harmful product.”

Verrall said the latest update from the Treasury showed the HTP tax cut was forecast to cost up to $293m if continued until 2029.

“It’s deeply worrying when our health system is underfunded that the Government is giving away $300m to the benefit of a single company with links to one of the coalition partners,” Verrall said.

The previous Labour government's, for all their flaws, sought to balance social progress with pragmatic governance, introducing measures like KiwiSaver and Working for Families to empower New Zealanders. National’s relentless criticism of the Clark and Ardern administrations as overbearing now looks like complete and utter projection. Luxon's coalition of chaos is by far the worst micromanagers New Zealand has ever seen.

This coalition, with its scattergun approach to policy and penchant for meddling in the minutiae of daily life, has taken the nanny state baton and run with it, straight into the farmyard, the polling booth, and the checkout counter. If this is National’s vision of "getting New Zealand back on track," then New Zealanders might wonder if the track leads to a bureaucracy more stifling than anything Helengrad could ever dream of.

Luxon Blames Labour for His Declining Popularity

It's been 21 months since Christopher Luxon’s National-led government was elected, yet the Prime Minister seems incapable of taking responsibility for his own policy decisions. His latest gaffe, blaming Labour for the booing he copped at a recent netball event, isn't just a laughable misstep...it's a stark reminder of his inability to own his government’s numerous failures.

Luxon’s attempt to deflect criticism onto his predecessors is as transparent as it is desperate. It paints him as a leader out of touch with a public growing weary of his hollow rhetoric. At the netball event, Luxon faced a chorus of boos from the crowd, a visceral expression of discontent that should have been a wake up call. But rather than reflecting on why he might be so unpopular, Luxon defaulted to his worn out playbook: blame Labour. It’s a tired refrain that’s starting to sound like a broken record.

 

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Watch: Christopher Luxon booed at netball premiership finals

Prime Minister Chrisopher Luxon appears to have been booed by spectators at the ANZ Premiership netball finals over the weekend.

Luxon was on stage to present awards after the final game.

Loud jeers from the crowd could be heard as Luxon was introduced, video from the official broadcast shows.

What prompted the crowd's reaction is unclear.

The Mainland Tactix broke their ANZ Premiership drought, dethroning two-time defending champions Northern Mystics 58-46 in the grand final at Auckland's Trusts Arena.

Comment has been requested from the prime minister's office.

He's due to speak to reporters at the Beehive about 4pm for this regular post-Cabinet press conference.

When pressed on the issue at his standup yesterday, Luxon proceeded to blame Labour for the crowds discontent. However, the crowd wasn’t booing Labour; they were booing Luxon’s leadership, or lack thereof. From slashing public services to pushing regressive tax cuts that favour the wealthy, his government’s policies have hit ordinary New Zealanders hard. The boos likely stemmed from specific grievances: the gutting of health and education funding, the cancellation of infrastructure projects, and the relentless cost-of-living squeeze that Luxon’s promised tax relief has done nothing to alleviate.

To suggest Labour, out of power since 2023, is somehow responsible for the public backlash isn't just dishonest, it’s downright delusional.

Luxon’s penchant for pointing the finger at Labour isn’t unique to him; it’s a National Party hallmark. Finance Minister Nicola Willis has repeatedly blamed Labour for the “bare fiscal cupboard,” whenever there's something the government doesn't want to fund, conveniently ignoring that her government’s choice to prioritise $2.9 billion in tax breaks for landlords instead of investing in frontline services has driven New Zealand backwards.

National MPs like Chris Bishop have often dismissed Labour’s critiques as the whining of a “failed team,” yet it’s National’s policies, like public sector cuts and a failure to address housing affordability, that have deepened the economic malaise. The Stats NZ data is damning: Real GDP per capita in New Zealand has declined by approximately 3.4% since National took power, with a technical recession directly linked to their neoliberal policy direction. Around 138,670 New Zealand citizens have emigrated away from New Zealand (a net loss of approximately 98,000 Kiwi) since Luxon took office. Unemployment has climbed to 5.1%, with over 15,000 public sector jobs axed under Luxon’s watch. This has had far reaching consequences for the New Zealand economy.

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

One year, 27,850 jobs gone Stats NZ latest data shows

New data shows there were 27,850 fewer jobs in New Zealand in June compared to the year before, and young people are feeling the impact of the weak labour market.

Stats NZ's latest data shows the number of filled jobs was up 0.1 percent month-on-month but down 1.2 percent year-on-year.

Compared to the year before, construction had lost 12,169 jobs, or 6 percent, manufacturing 5850 jobs, or 2.5 percent, professional, scientific and technical services 5150 jobs, or 2.7 percent, and admin and support services 4860 jobs, or 4.7 percent.

Education and training and primary industries added jobs.

People aged 15 to 19 had 10 percent fewer jobs, those 20 to 24 had 3.5 percent fewer and those ages 25 to 29 had 3.9 percent fewer.

These aren’t Labour’s numbers; they’re the direct result of National’s austerity obsession. Luxon’s claim that Labour’s “economic vandalism” is to blame for the downturn, and subsequently his unpopularity, is particularly galling when you look at the facts. Nearly two years into his first and hopefully last term as Prime Minister, and the statute of limitations on blaming the previous government has well and truly expired.

Data from Stats NZ today demonstrates how far we have fallen in the labour market. Between June 2019 and June 2023, we put on 225,000 new jobs. Since then, we have lost 31,216 jobs. A job lost every 34 minutes. A thread pic.twitter.com/Oq6cBtHTzB

— Craig Renney (@CLRenney) July 28, 2025

The coalition of chaos' policies, slashing public investment, undermining workers’ rights, and doubling down on the proven failure of trickle-down economics, have exacerbated the economic challenges Aotearoa faces, not alleviated them. The general public and those who attended the netball finals aren't stupid; they see through Luxon’s dishonest spin. His insistence on deflecting responsibility only underscores his lack of a coherent plan to address the prolonged recession, rising unemployment, and stagnant wages.

This blame-shifting is also endemic of Luxon’s campaign of misinformation. During the 2023 election, he promised tax cuts that would magically fix the cost-of-living crisis. However, the promised relief pales against soaring rents and astronomical grocery bills. We're seeing thousands of businesses close, not just because of unaffordable power, but because National is sucking billions of dollars out of the economy. His rhetoric about “getting New Zealand back on track” rings completely hollow when his government’s actions, such as cancelling social housing projects, unfair pay equity changes, and disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of voters will leave millions of struggling Kiwis worse off.

The boos at the netball event weren’t about Labour; they were about a Prime Minister who overpromised and underdelivered, all the while pointing the finger elsewhere when the cracks in National's propaganda are evident for all to see. Luxon’s leadership is looking increasingly like a corporate PowerPoint presentation: rehearsed, and devoid of any real substance or value.

Luxon's refusal to own his government’s numerous failures, whether it’s the economic downturn, job losses, or his own declining popularity, makes him look not just out of touch but downright foolish! Kiwis deserve a leader who takes responsibility, not one who hides behind tired excuses. The netball crowd knew it, and so does the rest of New Zealand.

Sean Plunket - Arsehole of the Week

Sean bloody Plunket, once a prominent voice in New Zealand’s media landscape, has descended into an ugly caricature of his former self, a broadcaster whose penchant for provocation has long overshadowed any claim of journalistic integrity.

His latest foray into controversy, a tweet mocking the humanitarian crisis in Gaza by referencing “anorexia” in a manner that denies Israel is murdering children through mass starvation (another war crime), marks a new low in a sad career littered with offensive outbursts.

The disgusting now deleted anorexia tweet not only drew rightful condemnation from all corners of New Zealand's politisphere, but also provided further justification for millionaire Wayne Wright Jr to have apparently cut Plunket's funding back in March 2024. This incident, however, is merely the latest in a long line of deplorable statements that have exposed his disregard for decency.

It’s official. @SeanPlunket is a complete fuckwit. To be making fun of the starving children in Gaza is absolutely despicable.

The Platform is for drop kicks! @theplatform_nz 🖕 pic.twitter.com/kJE8jPZlte

— 🌼 Random Kiwi 🌼 🇳🇴🇳🇿🇺🇸 (@RandomKiwiNZ) July 27, 2025

Plunket’s history reads like a catalogue of conceited moralising and divisive hot takes. In 2024, he compared Māui dolphins to “Down syndrome kids” and declared they “deserve to die,” a remark that sparked yet another public apology from the deluded washed up has-been. His 2021 claim that a Māori iwi “did not care about child abuse” during a COVID-19 discussion led to a Broadcasting Standards Authority complaint, a fine for MediaWorks, and his exit from MagicTalk, where colleagues later described a toxic workplace rife with homophobic, misogynistic, and transphobic rhetoric.

In 2023, he waded into the culture wars swamp, asking Prime Minister Chris Hipkins to define “what is a woman” in a press conference stunt that went viral for all the wrong reasons. That same year, he amplified anti-transgender activist Posie Parker (aka Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull), decrying counter-protests as “mob rule” while prioritising white female callers, revealing a clear ideological bias against a marginalised group.

His social media presence is equally peppered with reprehensible and dangerous rhetoric. Plunket’s received numerous Twitter suspensions, most notably in 2023 for breaching “hateful conduct” rules by sharing the banned Christchurch mosque shooter’s manifesto and private court information about David Farrier’s protection order. He again became an apologist for genocidal Israel in 2023 by retweeting a baseless theory blaming incest for “sickly children” in Gaza, further cementing his reputation for peddling harmful and dishonest narratives designed to blame the victims.

Misinformation is a recurring theme: in April 2023, he shared a fake ad claiming Jacinda Ardern hid a speaking engagement, only retracting it after it did the damage he intended. Plunket then falsely alleged Stuff was somehow biased because it received funding from Ngāi Tahu, a claim debunked by Stuff’s owner, Sinead Boucher. Rather than fostering free speech through open discussion, these incidents highlight the dishonesty of an unprincipled hack only interested in divisive rhetoric to gain the public's attention.

I struggle to think of a more odious New Zealand broadcaster than Sean Plunket

— Liam Vincent (@liamvincent26) July 27, 2025

Plunket’s fall from relevance is stark. Once a fixture on Radio New Zealand and TV3, his departure from mainstream media and retreat into fringe outlets such as The Platform, his own online echo chamber with regular appearances by New Zealand's most deluded cookers, signal a career in terminal decline. The loss of advertisers, funding, and public trust, underscored by legal battles, like a 2025 Employment Relations Authority ruling against him for workplace aggression, reflects badly on an old man terribly out of step with the ethical requirements that modern journalism demands. His provocative style, once a drawcard, is now so unhinged that it alienates more than it engages, leaving him preaching to a shrinking choir of similarly deranged contrarians desperately battling with their own insignificance.

In a media landscape that increasingly values accountability and empathy, Plunket’s brand of shock-jock vitriol is an anachronism. His disgusting Gaza tweet, mocking a preventable humanitarian catastrophe, isn't just a moral failure but a professional one, proving he no longer commands any semblance of respect for the profession. New Zealand deserves journalists who inform rather than inflame, and Plunket, with his track record of cruelty and misinformation, is no longer fit for that role. His legacy is one of squandered potential, a cautionary tale of how chasing controversy can reduce a once-respected voice to irrelevance.

The Coalition of Chaos' Assault on Electoral Fairness

The National-led government, propped up by its coalition partners ACT and New Zealand First, has embarked on a brazen assault on New Zealand’s democratic fabric. Their latest electoral law overhaul, set to decline hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders the right to vote by scrapping same-day enrolments, is a calculated move to tilt the electoral playing field in their favour. This is'nt just a bureaucratic tweak; it’s a deliberate act of voter suppression that threatens the very principles of fair representation.
 

Today, RNZ reported:

Enrolment changes could have 'significant' impact on democratic participation - Ministry of Justice

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says comments made by the deputy prime minister - calling voters who enrol late "dropkicks" - are "unhelpful", as changes to voter enrolment are rolled out.

Justice officials say closing enrolments ahead of advance voting could result in lower turnout and reduce confidence in the electoral system. And electoral law experts are also questioning why the changes need to stretch for the whole advanced voting period.

...

On Thursday, Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour backed the changes, insulting the hundreds of thousands of people who enrolled or updated their address, and voted, during the advance voting period and on election day itself.

"Frankly, I'm a bit sick of dropkicks that can't get themselves organised to follow the law," he said. "It's actually made so easy to do, they even have a little orange cartoon running around telling people to do it. And if you're too disorganised to do that over a thousand days between two elections, then maybe you don't care that much."

The coalition of chaos, as this shaky alliance has been correctly titled, is engineering a system where fewer voices, particularly those who've not enrolled in their local electorate, are heard at the ballot box. The decision to end same-day enrolment, a measure that allowed 110,000 New Zealanders to enrol or update details on election day in 2023, is nothing short of undemocratic. These voters, often young, Māori, Pasifika, or in unstable housing, are disproportionately likely to support progressive parties like Labour, the Greens, or Te Pāti Māori.

Constitutional law expert Andrew Geddis has noted that special votes, which include late enrolments, have historically favoured left-leaning parties. The government is effectively silencing people who don't agree with their neoliberal dogma, prioritising administrative convenience over democratic participation. Even the Ministry of Justice warned that these changes could lower turnout and erode confidence in the electoral system, a damning indictment of the coalition’s priorities.

ACT leader David Seymour’s contempt for our democracy is palpable. His dismissal of late enrolees as “dropkicks” who “can’t get themselves organised” reveals a deeper disdain for the very people democracy exists to serve. This isn't an isolated incident, but a window into the right-wing’s broader attitude: a belief that only the “deserving” should have a say. Seymour’s rhetoric, dripping with elitism, belies a worldview that sees voting as a privilege for the wealthy and sorted few, not a universal right. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith’s feeble rebuke of Seymour’s comments as “unhelpful” does little to mask the coalition’s complicity in this socially ignorant narrative.

Adding to this litany of anti-democratic measures is the government’s failure to address the unfairness that allows property owners with multiple homes to vote in each district where they own property. This archaic rule grants wealthier New Zealanders disproportionate influence in local elections, as their multiple votes amplify their voice over those who rent or own a single home. It’s a stark injustice that undermines the principle of equal representation. Compounding this, the coalition’s discussions about abolishing regional councils threaten to further erode local democracy. These councils, vital for environmental and community governance, ensure regional voices are heard. Dismantling them would centralise power and silence communities, reflecting the government’s broader pattern of prioritising control over democratic fairness.

The government’s anti-democratic streak doesn’t stop there. Their plan to reinstate a blanket ban on prisoner voting, reversing Labour’s 2020 reform that restored rights to those serving less than three years, is a shameful regression. This move will strip voting rights from an estimated 2,000–3,000 inmates, including those on remand who may later be acquitted, a clear violation of fundamental rights.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s response to concerns about this breaching the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, as ruled by the High Court in 2015, was a chilling “I do not care.” This flippant disregard for judicial rulings and human rights underscores a government more interested in populist posturing than upholding democratic principles.
 

Last year, RNZ reported:

 

Government rejects four voting changes as review lands

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has ruled out several recommendations from the Independent Electoral Review set up by the previous government.

The minister on Tuesday released the final report, which makes more than 117 recommendations, after it was delivered to him at the end of November 2023.

• Goldsmith ruled out action on some recommendations, including:
• Lowering the voting age to 16
• Allowing all prisoners to vote and stand for Parliament
• Freezing the ratio of electorate to list seats, which would lead to an increase in the number of MPs over time
• Repealing the offence of 'treating' voters with refreshments and entertainment.

Equally troubling is the coalition’s refusal to lower the voting age to 16. Despite a Supreme Court ruling affirming that 16 and 17-year-olds have the cognitive capacity for “cold decisions” like voting, and a 2024 Independent Electoral Review supporting the change, the government has stonewalled progress. They clearly don't want young people to get into the habit of voting throughout their lives. Their 2023 withdrawal of a bill that would have allowed 16 and 17-year-olds to vote in local body elections, with Local Government Minister Simeon Brown halting Justice Committee deliberations, snuffed out public consultation and silenced a generation eager to engage on issues that effect them directly.

This move, coupled with the coalition’s broader agenda, paints a picture of a government allergic to inclusive democracy. From voter suppression to disenfranchising prisoners and stifling youth voices, the National-led government’s actions betray a cynical and destructive agenda and won't do anything for our declining participation rates. By rigging the electoral system to mute progressive voters, they’re not just undermining democracy...they’re gambling with the trust that holds it together. Voters deserve better than a coalition of chaos that prioritises power over principle.

Luxon has Another Hissy Fit

In a display that can only be described as petulant, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has resorted to name-calling, branding Labour leader “frickin’ Chris Hipkins” in a heated outburst over National's FamilyBoost failure. This sorry spectacle, captured during a recent TV appearance, reveals a National Party leader unable to explain away the results of his failed policies and rattled by polls showing his popularity, and that of his coalition, sliding into the doldrums.
 

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Luxon snaps back at 'frickin' Chris Hipkins over National's FamilyBoost 'flop'

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has challenged Labour to front up with any policy at all as he comes under pressure over National's struggling childcare support scheme.

It comes after Labour revealed just 153 families had received the maximum FamilyBoost rebate, well short of the 21,000 families the government said would be eligible for the full amount when it was unveiled last year.

Speaking on his way into a Tuesday morning caucus meeting, Luxon rejected Labour's characterisation of the policy as a failure.

"I'm not taking any lectures from frickin' Chris Hipkins or the Labour Party," he told reporters. "They have no idea what to do. They put us in this mess.

It's not hard to see why voters are losing faith in Luxon's ability to govern New Zealand when all he has is bad PR stunts and blame for the opposition for his own government's socially and economically damaging policies.

For a government that promised economic salvation but has delivered little beyond finger-pointing and excuses, the latest Talbot and Mills poll should be a wake up call for Luxon to stop with the dishonest posturing, and get on with the bloody job. But instead all we get is a rattled PM doubling down with his blame Labour game.
 

Yesterday, The Post reported:

Poll suggests National headed to one-term Government

Concerning for the National-led coalition Government is the response to broader questions, including that 76% thought the economy was “not so good” or “poor” and 23% considered it “good” or “excellent”. Some 21% expected the economy to get better in the year ahead, while 37% thought it would get worse.

A slight majority, 51%, believed the country was on the wrong track, and the same number disapproved of the Government’s performance. While 38% believed the Government deserved to be re-elected, 48% thought it was time to give another party a go.

...

The Talbot Mills poll has tended to have a National-ACT-NZ First coalition ahead, though the poll suggested support for a Labour-led Government in its February and March results.

This remained the case in this newly obtained poll, which had Labour at 35%, National at 32%, the Green Party at 12%, ACT at 8%, NZ First at 7% and Te Pāti Māori at 3.8%.

Assuming Te Pāti Māori retained the six Māori electorates -- which is not a given as a by-election for Tāmaki Makaurau nears -- such a result would give a Labour-led Government the balance of power.

Luxon’s Coalition of Chaos is scrambling to pin the blame for New Zealand’s economic woes on Labour, conveniently ignoring the global context of a pandemic that sent inflation soaring worldwide. They harp on about the inflation rate in the final quarter of Labour’s tenure, as if National’s own policies haven’t fanned the flames of the current cost-of-living crisis. Stats NZ reports inflation at 2.7% for the year to June, with projections suggesting it could climb above 3%, a figure that undercuts National’s narrative of having tamed the beast.

Far from addressing the crisis, National’s policies, marked by austerity and tax cuts skewed towards the wealthy, have left ordinary New Zealanders grappling with soaring electricity bills and out of control grocery costs. Labour’s Barbara Edmonds hit the nail on the head: “Christopher Luxon promised to make the cost of living better, instead, he’s making it worse.”

Luxon isn't doing himself any favours. One minute he's saying National must “own the mess” of inflation increasing to 2.7%; the next, he lashes out at Hipkins, accusing Labour of causing the very crisis his government has failed to mitigate. This hypocrisy is staggering. National wants to claim credit for inflation dropping from its 2022 peak of 7.3%, yet dismisses the fact that the current 2.7% rate is higher than the projected 2.1%, largely due to government policies. Any increase to infaltion while wages stagnate still bites hard into household budgets, particularly those on fixed incomes.

#BHN For close to 2 years National's main push back against negative numbers was "blame Labour" but not the PM has owed inflation, all that is over #nzpol #nzpolitics pic.twitter.com/fRe5tJHA3J

— Pat Brittenden (@patbrittenden) July 22, 2025

Along with the cost-of-living crisis, where basic items such as butter has increased in price by 60% in just one year, National's much-vaunted FamilyBoost tax credit, touted as a lifeline for families, has been exposed as another complete failure, with Labour revealing that only a tiny fraction of eligible households are receiving the full $75 promised.

The pressure of these numerous missteps is clearly beginning to tell, and Luxon appears to be incapable of coping with the fallout from his own policy failures.

The coalition’s economic strategy is a house of cards. Relaxing immigration settings and giving billions to wealthy people while slashing public spending has failed to spark the promised recovery, with unemployment rising and consumer confidence tanking. The 1News-Verian poll shows just 36% of Kiwis feel optimistic about the economy, a 5-point drop since December, while 50% believe the country is heading in the wrong direction.

Luxon’s coalition, including ACT and NZ First, seems more focused on divisive culture wars than on delivering tangible relief. The Prime Minister's name-calling is a sign of desperation, not leadership. His government’s failure to address the cost-of-living crisis, coupled with their eagerness to blame Labour for systemic issues, exposes a lack of vision, vision that is desperately needed to bring New Zealand into the 21st century.

Hipkins, by contrast, has called for a focus on “bread and butter” issues such as jobs, health, and homes, while warning against being distracted by National’s divisive tactics. As the 2026 election looms, Kiwis are growing weary of National’s empty slogans and broken promises. Luxon’s outburst isn’t just a lapse in decorum; it’s a symptom of a right-wing government out of ideas and out of touch.

The Left Must Unite on Voter-Friendly Tax Reform

The left wing in New Zealand stands at a critical crossroads. As the cost-of-living crisis deepens and economic pressures intensify, Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori must unite to deliver voter-friendly tax policies that resonate with everyday New Zealanders. The current tax system, strained by inequity and inefficiency, demands reform that prioritises fairness, fosters growth, and protects those already stretched thin, such as beneficiaries, low-waged workers, and small businesses being pushed to the brink. Without a cohesive strategy that places people, and not the government, first, the left risks alienating voters and ceding ground to the current Neoliberal Government and groups like the Taxpayers’ Union, whose campaign for a cap on rates will be gaining traction among elderly homeowners, a key voting demographic.


On Sunday, The Standard reported:

 

The left should unite on tax, fast

With less than 18 months to go to the election, Labour doesn’t yet have a tax policy. The Greens do. Tax policy done badly will almost certainly stop Labour and the Greens changing this government. But they have to deal with it.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins said in March this year that too much investment was going into property rather than “productive businesses that create jobs,” but didn’t elaborate further.

When asked directly if the party would be campaigning on a capital gains tax, Hipkins said: “We’ll campaign on tax reform … now, the exact nature of that, it’s not just a simple issue of this one tax or that one tax.”

Hipkins’ election 2023 position was that “I’m confirming today that under a government I lead there will be no wealth or capital gains tax after the election. End of story.”

The Taxpayers’ Union’s push for rate caps taps into a genuine concern: spiralling costs for homeowners, particularly pensioners, who feel squeezed by rising local government charges will be looking for relief. This resonates because it speaks to fairness, an idea the left should champion more often. However, rate caps, although they will be resonating, are a blunt instrument, potentially starving councils of the revenue needed to maintain ageing infrastructure or invest in climate-resilient systems. Labour and the Greens must counter with a bold, unified vision that balances rates and tax relief with the funding required for councils and government agencies to deliver essential services. The detail should be in-depth, but selling it should be simple and to the point.

A return to a 10% GST rate, for instance, could ease the cost-of-living burden on families, putting more money back into the pockets of those who need it most. Likewise, making the first $10,000 of income tax-free would directly support low-waged workers and beneficiaries, shielding them from a regressive tax system. Such measures would not only provide relief but also kick start the economy. Higher wages and increased benefits for low-income earners are not just moral imperatives; they’re economic necessities. People on tight budgets spend what they have on things like groceries, bills, and local services, directly stimulating demand.

A wealth tax must be implemented in such a way that doesn't give rise to criticism such as claims that it's an envy tax. The fear of capital flight, for instance, where wealthy individuals relocate to avoid taxes, has often been exaggerated in debates over wealth taxes targeting the ultra-rich. Evidence from countries like Norway, Spain, and Switzerland, suggests minimal capital flight after wealth taxes have been undertaken. In Norway, a 2022 wealth tax increase to 1.1% on net wealth exceeding NZ$3.2 million (NOK 20 million) prompted initial claims of significant departures, with estimates suggesting 30–82 high-net-worth individuals (0.01%–0.03% of Norway’s millionaire population of 236,000) left. However, updated analyses indicates the scale of Norway's capital flight was badly overstated.

 

Spain’s 2011 wealth tax, reintroduced in 2022 as a “solidarity” tax on net assets above NZ$5 million (€3 million), affects the richest 0.5% of households and has seen increased revenue with negligible flight. Switzerland’s long-standing wealth tax, ranging from 0.13% to 0.94% on net assets above NZ$170,000 (SFr 100,000), impacts a broader 10%–15% of the population due to lower thresholds but has not driven significant capital flight, with its appeal sustained by low overall tax burdens and no capital gains tax on movable assets. 

France’s pre-2017 wealth tax (ISF) saw around 370 departures in 2003 (0.02% of its wealthy population), dropping to 163 by 2018 (0.01%) after reforms, indicating limited flight. These cases show that well-designed wealth taxes, with high thresholds and robust enforcement, can limit flight risks while raising revenue, countering narratives that taxing the rich inevitably drives them away.

The top 1% of NZ owns 25% of the wealth. The top 10% owns 70% of the wealth. The bottom *half* of the country owns less than 2% of the wealth. David Seymour sees no problem with this. pic.twitter.com/YEEpAaSbrN

— antihobbes (@antihobbes) May 2, 2022

This approach contrasts sharply with National, NZ First and the ACT Parties tax cuts for the wealthy, money that has little to no economic benefit as it generally languishes in savings accounts or offshore investments. The left must champion policies that channel money to those who will spend it, driving growth from the ground up. However, they must proceed cautiously. Additional taxes, particularly those impacting small businesses, could choke off the enterprises that employ many New Zealanders. The left cannot afford to alienate the small business community, already battered by economic headwinds and domestic policies that have lead to a prolonged downturn.

The challenge is to craft a tax system that funds ambitious social and infrastructure investments without stifling growth. Councils need capital to address ageing water networks and urban development, while government agencies require resources for healthcare, education, and climate initiatives. Current tax settings, if maintained or reduced strategically, can provide this capital, but only if allocation and redistribution is undertaken wisely. Labour and the Greens must resist the urge to impose new taxes that could be seen as punitive, especially by voters wary of the government overreach we've often seen from previous administrations.

A united front is essential to sell this vision. Infighting or divergent policies risk diluting the message and handing ammunition to opponents who thrive on division. The left’s tax reform must be bold yet pragmatic, offering tangible relief while safeguarding the revenue needed for a resilient future. Reducing GST or introducing a tax-free threshold would signal a commitment to fairness, while careful stewardship of existing revenue can ensure councils and agencies aren’t left short. The left wing must sell a long term vision for the future of New Zealand capturing the public's imagination in a way that the mainstream media cannot ignore.

By uniting behind a voter-friendly platform that prioritises low-income earners, protects small businesses, and counters the Coalition of Chaos and Taxpayer Union’s narrow narrative, Labour and the Greens can reclaim the high ground on the economic debate. The alternative, fragmentation sound bites that the MSM intentionally ignore, will only embolden those seeking to dismantle the progressive direction needed to increase everybodies quality of life. The time for clarity and unity is now.

NZ Must Implement a Four-day Work Week

New Zealand finds itself at a critical juncture. With productivity growth stagnating and our brightest minds departing for greener pastures abroad, the time has come for bold shift in policy direction. The solution may be counterintuitive: working less to achieve more through the implementation of a four-day working week.

Today, RNZ reported:

 

Four-day work week reduces burnout and improves job satisfaction - study

Working a four day week reduces burnout and improves job satisfaction, a new study has found.

The research out of Boston College in the United States tested the effect of reducing employees hours to a four-day week with no reduction in pay.

The study held six-month trials reducing the working hours for 2896 employees across 141 organisations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, Ireland and the USA.

The outcomes of the trials were then compared with 12 control companies that did not transition to the shorter work week.

The researchers found that employees with a reduction of eight hours or more per work week self-reported experiencing larger reductions in burnout and improvements in job satisfaction and mental health, as compared with those at companies that maintained a five-day work week.

A small change in physical health was also seen, but the researchers said they expected this was less significant because changes in physical health take time to manifest.

 

The international evidence is compelling and mounting. Belgium became the first country in Europe to legislate for a four-day week in 2022, with Belgian employees winning the right to perform a full workweek in four days instead of the usual five without loss of salary. Microsoft Japan's pioneering trial delivered remarkable results, with overall employee productivity boosted by 40%. Across multiple studies, almost half of respondents said productivity improved either slightly or significantly, with the vast majority of organisations expressing strong interest in continuing such arrangements.

These overseas cases demonstrate a fundamental truth that traditional workplace orthodoxy has long resisted: productivity is not merely a function of hours worked but of focused, engaged, and well-rested human capital. Countries from Spain, Iceland and South Africa to the United States, Germany and Italy are implementing trials and witnessing tangible benefits including reduced healthcare costs, lower employee turnover, and enhanced recruitment capabilities.

New Zealand's productivity crisis demands urgent attention. The world has been experiencing a productivity slowdown, from which New Zealand has not been exempt, and this matters because sustainable improvements in our living standards depend upon our productivity. Recent Treasury analysis reveals the stark reality facing our nation: when an economy fails to become more productive, real wages stagnate and living standards suffer.

New Zealand Productivity

The National-led government's approach to addressing this challenge has been fundamentally misguided. Rather than investing in innovative workplace policies that could enhance both productivity and worker wellbeing, we've witnessed a regression towards policies that actively undermine both. The dismantling of fair pay agreements, weakening of worker protections, and pursuit of austerity measures that reduce public investment in productivity-enhancing infrastructure represent a backwards step that will inevitably worsen our competitive position.

These regressive policies have created a demoralising environment for New Zealand workers. Employment law changes that strip away hard-won rights, combined with wage policies that fail to keep pace with inflation, send a clear message: that worker wellbeing and prosperity are secondary considerations to short-term cost-cutting measures. This approach is economically self-defeating, as it not only means less revenue circulating within the economy, it also drives our most talented individuals offshore where they can access better working conditions, higher wages, and more progressive employment practices.

The brain drain accelerating under current policies represents not merely individual career decisions but a national crisis of human capital flight. When our best and brightest seek opportunities in jurisdictions that value work-life balance, offer competitive remuneration, provide better housing opportunities, and implement forward-thinking workplace innovations like four-day working weeks, New Zealand loses the very talent we've trained and need to drive productivity improvements and economic growth here in Aotearoa.

A four-day working week represents more than workplace reform; it constitutes a strategic economic intervention. By reducing working hours while maintaining productivity levels, we create conditions for enhanced innovation, reduced stress-related health costs (particularly relevant as our workforce ages) and improved retention of skilled workers. The model offers particular appeal to younger generations who increasingly prioritise workplace flexibility and well-being alongside traditional career advancement.

The path forward requires political courage to challenge conventional wisdom about workplace organisation. Rather than pursuing policies that treat workers as expendable and a cost to be minimised, we must embrace approaches that recognise human potential as our nation's greatest asset. A four-day working week pilot programme, implemented across selected public and private sector organisations, could demonstrate the productivity gains and wellbeing improvements that international evidence suggests are achievable.

New Zealand cannot afford to persist with outdated workplace models whilst competing nations embrace innovative approaches to human capital management. The choice is stark: continue with regressive policies that drive talent offshore and suppress productivity growth, or adopt progressive workplace reforms that enhance both economic performance and citizen wellbeing. The four-day working week offers a tangible pathway towards reversing our current trajectory and building a more prosperous, equitable future for all New Zealanders.

National Claims Credit for Labour’s Infrastructure Legacy

In a brazen display of political opportunism, the National-led government, under Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, has attempted to claim credit for a $6 billion infrastructure package that is little more than a re-announcement of projects meticulously planned and funded for by the previous Labour government. Far from showcasing bold leadership, Luxon’s coalition has delayed critical projects and, in some cases, slashed their budgets, all while spinning a narrative of fiscal prudence. This Coalition of Chaos isn't only riding on Labour’s coattails, but also undermining New Zealand’s infrastructure progress through cuts, cancellations and misrepresentations.

 

Today, 1 News reported:

 

Govt trumpets billions being spent on infrastructure in coming months

The Government has released an infrastructure update showing $6 billion of state-funded construction is due to start between now and Christmas.

The ministers who were visiting a construction site in Drury spoke to media this morning. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon also took part in the briefing.

Minister for Economic Growth Nicola Willis and Minister for Infrastructure Chris Bishop said in a media release that the projects would drive economic activity and create thousands of jobs across the country.

"The projects getting underway include new roads, hospitals, schools, high-tech laboratories and other government buildings," Willis said.

Consider the Ōtaki to Levin expressway, a vital roading project to ease congestion and boost regional connectivity. Labour’s Upgrade Programme in 2020 allocated $817 million for this project, with construction initially slated for 2022, but delayed due to planning and consenting processes. Under National, however, the project completely stalled, with start dates pushed out to late 2025 inflating costs by aproximately $783 million. Luxon’s government now touts this project as part of their $6 billion “new” infrastructure plan, conveniently glossing over Labour’s original funding and their own role in stalling progress.

The Dunedin Hospital redevelopment, another cornerstone of Labour’s health infrastructure investment, was budgeted for with $1.4 billion allocated in 2021, with construction underway by 2022. National’s coalition, however, delayed key phases, pushing full completion beyond 2028, cutting $200 million from the project’s budget in 2024, citing “cost efficiencies.” Yet, Chris Luxon, Chris Bishop, and Nicola Willis’ recent announcement framed the hospital as a new National Party achievement, completely ignoring their funding reductions that have strained its delivery.

School upgrades, including roll-growth classrooms, modular buildings designed to accommodate growing student numbers due to population increases, were part of Labour’s $3.9 billion education infrastructure package in 2020, with $400 million for the National Education Growth Plan to add 6,600 student places. National trimmed $150 million from this programme in Budget 2024, redirecting funds to charter schools that aren't going to be required to report student numbers. For anybody who's paying attention, National re-announcing these classroom projects as their own looks pretty damn stupid.

National’s cuts to infrastructure, particularly the cancellation of 3,500 Kāinga Ora state house builds, have triggered a severe downturn in the construction sector, exacerbating unemployment and driving thousands of skilled workers overseas. Labour’s $1.5 billion public housing investment was designed to deliver 18,000 homes by 2024, sustaining thousands of construction jobs. National’s decision to halt these builds (selling partially completed state houses and bare land to their mates at a loss), alongside $2 billion in school building cuts and cancelled hospital upgrades, has led to an estimated 15,000 job losses in the sector. A whopping 13,000 construction workers left New Zealand in 2024 alone, many to Australia, where demand remains strong. This exodus threatens the industry’s capacity to deliver future projects, as skilled tradespeople, including carpenters and electricians, are unlikely to return to New Zealand for lower wages and a higher cost of living, leaving the sector in a precarious state.

JUST ANNOUNCED: $6 billion worth of infrastructure projects are getting underway in the next few months, which will grow NZ’s economy and create thousands of jobs across the country. pic.twitter.com/yY3PLCUKkd

— NZ National Party (@NZNationalParty) July 19, 2025

National’s policy changes since taking power in late 2023 have significantly contributed to a surge in company liquidations, particularly in the construction sector, as funding cuts and economic pressures have squeezed businesses to breaking point. According to data from the New Zealand Companies Office, 2,500 businesses were liquidated in 2024, a 35% increase from 2023, with construction firms accounting for 25% of these. These figures reflect the fallout from National’s cancellation of $1.5 billion in Kāinga Ora state house builds and $2 billion in infrastructure projects, which starved the sector of work and exacerbated cashflow issues. Rising interest rates and inflation, unmitigated by National’s policies, have further strained small and medium enterprises, with the Building Industry Federation noting a 72% jump in construction liquidations in early 2023 compared to the prior year. This wave of insolvencies underscores the devastating impact of National’s austerity measures on an already fragile industry.

But what makes the National Parties credit-grabbing particularly galling is their hypocrisy in criticising Labour for policies they inherited from John Key’s National government. Open-plan classrooms, once championed by Key’s administration with $1.2 billion invested between 2011 and 2016, are now derided by National Minister's who imply that they were Labour’s misstep, despite National’s policy changes requiring their rollout, at great cost to already stretched budgets. Similarly, biking infrastructure, funded with $390 million under Key to promote sustainable transport, is now mocked as wasteful “woke” spending by a coalition desperate to rewrite its own history.

Here's National's Minister of Education, Erica Stanford, stupidly implying that open-plan classrooms were Labour's idea:

"So multiple govt's over multiple years who've been flip-flopping around without any evidence, but the evidence is clear that these classrooms are not optimal."

Not to be outdone, Luxon’s standout moments of mendacity shine through in his rhetoric. In his State of the Nation address, he claimed Labour left a $200 billion “hole” in transport commitments, a figure easily debunked and described by Labour leader Chris Hipkins as “absolute nonsense,” noting it equates to half of New Zealand’s GDP. Labour’s transport plans, funded at $2.68 billion annually through three-year cycles, were sustainable, with tools like value capture in development. National, however, cut rail funding from $1.2 billion in 2023 to $466 million in 2024, undermining projects like the Auckland Strategic Rail Programme, only for Winston Peters to re-announce select rail investments to try and save face.

The Coalition of Chaos, fractured by tensions between National, ACT, and New Zealand First, seems united only in its desperation to obscure Labour’s legacy. By delaying projects, cutting budgets ($200 million from Dunedin Hospital, $150 million from education infrastructure, and $734 million from rail) and re-announcing them as their own, Luxon’s government reveals a stark lack of original vision or planning ability, which they continuously try to obscure by blaming Labour for their own failures.

New Zealanders deserve better than a dishonest government that lies to claim credit while dismantling the foundations laid by the previous Labour led government. If Luxon truly wants to “get New Zealand back on track,” he might start by acknowledging the tracks Labour funded and the cuts his coalition continues to make to our vital infrastructure.

The Persistent Stain of Sexism Within the NZ Police Force

The New Zealand Police have long prided themselves on being a cornerstone of community trust, tasked with upholding law and order with impartiality. Yet, recent allegations of a pervasive "boys' club" culture within the Northland detective ranks expose a troubling undercurrent of sexism that undermines this mission. Senior police manager Bridget Louise Doell, with three decades of service, has laid bare a toxic workplace marked by gossip, exclusion, and bullying during an Employment Relations Authority hearing in Whangārei. Her claims of being sidelined by a predominantly male detective team reveal a systemic issue that not only harms individuals but also cripples the operational efficacy of the police force.


Today, RNZ reported:

Senior police manager alleges 'boys' club' culture among Northland detectives

A senior police manager alleges she was met with swirling gossip, private group chats and a pervasive "boys' club" culture when she stepped into a leadership role overseeing the predominantly male detective team in Northland.

The allegations now form the basis of an Employment Relations Authority (ERA) hearing in Whangārei this week.

Bridget Louise Doell, a senior police officer with three decades of experience, was seconded to the crime area manager role in 2020, overseeing senior detectives in the criminal investigation branch (CIB) at Whangārei police station.

The role involves operational oversight of inspectors, but Doell's evidence has been that the transition was met with resistance.

Over the next three years, she claims she was sidelined by detectives, describing a toxic workplace culture marked by gossip, exclusion from key decisions, and repeated allegations of bullying.

Doell’s experience is not an isolated incident. A 2021 Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) report found that a quarter of police staff had faced abuse, bullying, or harassment, with sexism and a "boys' club" culture identified as significant drivers. The report highlighted shocking examples: female officers being demeaned as "the girls" or assigned menial tasks, and one case where a topless photo of a female officer was circulated without consent. These behaviours, often dismissed as "banter," foster an environment where women are marginalised, their contributions undervalued, and their authority undermined. Such a culture erodes morale and deters capable women from pursuing leadership roles, weakening the force’s diversity and perspective.

The operational impact of this sexism is profound. Effective policing relies on trust, both within the force and with the public. When female officers like Doell are excluded from key decisions or face resistance from subordinates, as she alleged when detective inspectors bypassed her to meet with the Crown Solicitor, it disrupts the chain of command. This undermines case management, delays justice, and risks errors in investigations. The 2021 IPCA report noted instances where bullying officers failed to provide backup to colleagues in the field, a direct threat to operational safety. If officers cannot rely on their team due to discriminatory attitudes, the ability to respond to emergencies or complex investigations is compromised.

Historical cases further illustrate the depth of the problem. The 2007 Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct, sparked by Louise Nicholas’s allegations of sexual violence by officers, exposed a culture of cover-ups and misogyny. Despite promises of reform, the persistence of similar issues nearly two decades later suggests a failure to address root causes. In 2014, a police unit faced scrutiny after two staff were suspended for sending lewd footage to a colleague, alongside bullying allegations. These incidents reflect a pattern where sexist behaviour is not just tolerated but normalised, eroding public confidence in the police’s ability to handle sensitive cases, particularly those involving gender-based violence.


Last year, RNZ reported:

Female police officer harassed by senior, investigation flawed - IPCA

A senior police officer sexually harassed a female officer, but an internal investigation process was flawed, the independent police conduct authority has concluded.

The woman officer complained to police at the end of a two-month secondment where she was in the senior officer's section under his supervision, prompting an internal police investigation as well as an investigation by the independent police conduct authority (IPCA).

She said the senior officer - labelled as Officer A in the IPCA report - had frequently made inappropriate comments towards her, including some that were sexual. And that this had increased to the point she was concerned his behaviour could become physical and felt unsafe working with him, the IPCA said in a summary report.

In 2021, Star News reported:

 

'Boys club': Sexism, bullying, nepotism highlighted in review of police culture

Nepotism, cronyism and gaslighting have contributed to pockets of toxic culture in the New Zealand police, a new report into bullying and abuse has found.

Despite issuing scathing criticisms and outlining stories of abuse and harassment, the Independent Police Conduct Authority said recent police reforms show promise.

Two interviewees said when they were out in the field and radioed for immediate backup because they were at risk, bully officers failed to provide back-up.

"The interviewees subsequently verified that these other officers had been in radio contact and not involved in any other urgent job," the IPCA added.

In 2017, Stuff reported:

Lynley Tulloch: Police standards, sexism and social sadism

This programme of reform in 2007 was intended to shape the future direction of the police service. The report stated that police misconduct must be "dealt with professionally, expeditiously, and in a manner that gives both complainants and the general public no reason for concern".

Just this year another report was released documenting the police response to this Commission of Inquiry. Commissioner Mike Bush acknowledged that police deserved scrutiny over their behaviour. He said that there had been a lot of work done in attitudinal change in police culture over the past 10 years.

Clearly nothing, despite a number of investigations and reports, has really improved. The cost of this culture extends beyond internal dysfunction. Public trust is the bedrock of effective policing, yet how can victims of sexual assault or domestic violence have faith in a force that struggles to confront its own biases? The IPCA has acknowledged progress under Police Commissioner Andy Coster, with action plans to address toxic behaviours. However, the recurrence of these issues in Northland suggests that reforms are either superficial or inconsistently applied. Without rigorous, transparent processes to root out sexism, the police risk perpetuating a cycle of distrust that directly creates inefficiency.

To restore faith, the New Zealand Police must prioritise systemic change. This means not only disciplining offenders but also dismantling the structures that enable a "boys' club" mentality. Leadership must model inclusivity, and recruitment and promotion processes should actively counter bias. Even though the Police are desperate for new recruits, the operational stakes are too high for half-measures. A police force that fails to respect its own cannot hope to protect and serve the public with integrity. Until sexism is confronted head-on, the stain on the force’s reputation, and its inability to deliver justice, will only worsen.

The Jevon McSkimming Scandal Raises Serious Questions

The recent revelations about former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming have sent shockwaves throughout New Zealand. The discovery of child sexual exploitation and bestiality material allegedly found on his work devices is not just a personal failing but a systemic betrayal of public trust, a betrayal that must not be swept under the carpet. It demands a full inquiry into how McSkimming went undetected and raises serious questions about whether he was part of a wider network of depravity within the New Zealand Police Force.


Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Revealed: Child exploitation and bestiality material allegedly found on former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming's work devices

Child exploitation and bestiality material were allegedly found on former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming's work devices, it can now be revealed.

The revelation comes after a High Court judge dismissed an application to prevent media reporting the nature of the alleged objectionable material.

McSkimming resigned as the country's second most powerful cop in May amid separate investigations by the Independent Police Conduct Authority and police.

His resignation came a week after RNZ approached him, via his lawyer, with allegations about material found on his work devices.

RNZ earlier revealed pornography found on McSkimming's work devices was being investigated as alleged objectionable material.

His lawyer Linda Clark was then granted a rare "superinjunction" by Justice Karen Grau that prohibited reporting that disclosed the nature of the allegedly objectionable material, as well as the existence of the injunction itself.

McSkimming’s ascent to Deputy Commissioner, a position of immense power, was procedurally endorsed by then-Prime Minister Chris Hipkins in 2023, following a Public Service Commission selection process that apparently missed the rot beneath the surface. This isn’t the first time the police vetting system has failed us. Most notably, the 2018 inquiry into the appointment of Wally Haumaha exposed significant flaws in the vetting process, including inadequate scrutiny of candidates’ backgrounds and conflicts of interest. Haumaha’s interference during the 2004 Operation Austin, an investigation into historical rape allegations against police officers Clint Rickards, Brad Shipton, and Bob Schollum, whereby he downplayed their crimes, was unbecoming of an officer of the law.

Haumaha, who worked closely with the serial Police rapists in Rotorua during the 1980s and 1990s, reportedly dismissed victim Louise Nicholas’ allegations as “nonsense,” suggested officers “stick together,” and described Shipton as a “big softie” and Schollum as a “legend” with women, remarks that downplayed the numerous serious sexual assault allegations against his colleges. This type of culture within the Police is likely widespread and clearly hinders accountability, evidently resulting in only 4.2% of all sexual assault victimisations (reported and unreported) being prosecuted, and just 1.2% resulting in convictions. Who is to say that such a sick culture that treats all complainants as liars isn't also in play when victims are making allegations of bestiality or pedophilia against Police officers?

Recommendations from the Haumaha inquiry, intended to tighten oversight, appear to have been ignored or inadequately implemented. How else could someone like McSkimming, allegedly harbouring such grotesque proclivities, slip through the cracks?

The McSkimming case isn't an isolated blemish. New Zealand has seen other high-profile figures caught with objectionable material or involved in sexual offending. Tim Jago, former president of the ACT Party, was convicted of eight counts of indecent assault after being found guilty of sexually abusing two teenage boys in the 1990s whom he knew through an Auckland surf lifesaving club that he was defrauding. He was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison in November 2024. Ron Brierley, a celebrated corporate raider knighted in 1988 and known for his close ties to powerful politicians like former Prime Ministers Robert Muldoon and Jenny Shipley, pleaded guilty in 2021 to possessing over 11,000 images of child sexual abuse after his 2019 arrest in Sydney.

Then there's Anthony "Aussie" Malcolm, a former National Party MP for Eden and Cabinet minister who died in September 2024, who was under police investigation at the time of his death following multiple complaints of historical child sexual abuse, including allegations he sexually assaulted a teenager in 1992. Not to mention former Auckland councillor David Tamihere, (John Tamihere's brother) who was convicted in the 1990s for possessing child abuse material.

More recently, Michael Forbes, deputy chief press secretary to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, resigned in June 2025 after a questionable police investigation revealed he recorded audio of Wellington sex workers without their consent and amassed intrusive photos and videos of women in public and private settings.

These cases underscore a disturbing pattern: sexual predators in positions of power are evading accountability due to vetting systems that appear woefully inadequate.

As well as a large question mark over the organisations that have allowed such despicable individuals to attain positions of power, the decisions these individuals made, whether in policy, governance, or law enforcement, must now be thoroughly re-examined. Were their judgments clouded by their sick depravities? Did their access to sensitive material enable them to undertake further crimes? Did the access they had to various government and police systems allow them to cover-up their crimes or, worse, protect others who share similar criminal interests? The public deserves answers to these very serious questions.

The possibility that McSkimming’s actions were not isolated but part of a broader pedophile network within the police cannot be easily dismissed. Speculation on social media has raised concerns about systemic corruption, with some alleging that the police under former leadership failed to pursue certain offenders due to institutional rot. While these claims largely remain unverified, they fuel public distrust and highlight the need for a thorough investigation into whether McSkimming’s alleged crimes were enabled or concealed by others within the force. The pattern of his offending points to the conclusion that McSkimming has been offending for a long time. So why wasn't he caught earlier?

The police are entrusted to protect our most vulnerable, yet McSkimming’s case suggests a betrayal at the highest levels. A full, independent inquiry is therefore non-negotiable. It must probe not only how McSkimming, and potentially other police officers, evaded detection but also whether the recommendations from the Haumaha inquiry were deliberately sidelined. Why were routine audits of police device usage paused in 2020, as Commissioner Richard Chambers admitted? Why were internal controls so weak that staff could bypass them to access inappropriate content? These are not mere oversights; they point to a culture of negligence that must be dismantled.

Politicians and police must face stricter vetting, with ongoing monitoring to ensure those in power are held to the highest of standards. The Policing Act is clear: a Deputy Commissioner must be a fit and proper person. McSkimming’s alleged actions might mock that standard, but we cannot allow the taint of such depravity to linger or poison the rest of the New Zealand Police force.

A public inquiry, coupled with a review of decisions influenced by those implicated in such scandals, is essential to restore trust. New Zealand must confront the spectre of pedophiles within positions of power head-on, rooting out any networks that may lurk within our institutions. The safety of our children and the integrity of our justice and political systems depend on it.

Tama Potaka Hides Homelessness Report as Crisis Deepens

In a move that reeks of political obfuscation, Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka has sat on a critical homelessness insights report for over a month, refusing to make it public while claiming he’s still “seeking official advice” on its contents. This delay isn't just bureaucratic dawdling; it’s a calculated attempt to bury inconvenient truths about the National-led government’s role in exacerbating New Zealand’s homelessness crisis.

On Wednesday, Stuff reported:

Labour pushes for Potaka to release homelessness briefing amid concerns over rising numbers

Labour is demanding the release of a government briefing on homelessness, warning it may confirm that record-level homelessness has worsened under the National-led coalition’s watch.

“Everyone is saying that homelessness is going up at unprecedented levels,” Labour’s housing spokesperson Kieran McAnulty said. “Given that he [Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka] is the only one - alongside the prime minister and the minister of housing - that is denying homelessness is going up, I’m not surprised he’s pretty reluctant to release the report.”

Potaka received the latest homelessness insights report from the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last month, part of a regular six-monthly series monitoring the effects of government housing policy to reduce the number of people living in emergency housing through toughening the entry criteria.

But he has yet to make the document public, saying he is still seeking official advice on its contents, although he has acknowledged anecdotal evidence pointed to a rising trend.

 

As the streets of Auckland and Wellington swell with those left without shelter, the government’s refusal to release this data speaks volumes about it prioritising optics over people.

The Coalition of Chaos' policies have systematically dismantled the safety nets that once offered hope to the most vulnerable. Their aggressive push to slash emergency housing numbers, celebrated by them as a 75% reduction in households living in motels (from 3,141 in December 2023 to 591 by January 2025), masks a grim reality.

While Tama Potaka trumpets that 2,124 children have moved from motels to “homes,” the government admits it doesn’t track where 20% of these families, roughly 510 households, have ended up. The evidence points to a spike in rough sleeping, with Auckland Council reporting a 53% rise in people living on the streets between September 2024 and January 2025. Wellington’s Downtown Community Ministry also noted a 33% increase in rough sleepers from October to December 2024.

Changes to emergency housing eligibility have tightened the screws on those already at breaking point. Stricter criteria mean applicants are increasingly declined or deemed ineligible, with some turned away because their decision to flee domestic violence was seen as “contributing” to their homelessness, a grotesque misinterpretation that Potaka has publicly disavowed but still persists.
 

On June 16, Stuff reported:

Tama Potaka denies blame on homelessness, as Women’s Refuge raises alarm

Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka is denying his policies are to blame for reports of increased homelessness or domestic violence victims being denied emergency housing.

...

Women’s Refuge says access to emergency housing an issue

Potaka was also questioned about reports the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) had denied emergency housing to women attempting to escape domestic violence.

Last week, Stuff heard from charities across the country that raised concerns about difficulties accessing emergency housing for people leaving violent homes.

The Ministry of Social Development’s scrapping of the first phase of its “early interventions” programme, meant to prevent homelessness, was ludicrously justified by an overwhelming workload tied to Jobseeker benefit changes, leaving vulnerable Kiwis to fend for themselves. These policies, coupled with the government’s refusal to reinstate a legal obligation for MSD to grant emergency housing, have created a revolving door of hardship.

Compounding this crisis is National’s gutting of state housing. Thousands of planned public housing builds, with Kāinga Ora halting the development of 212 housing projects that would have delivered 3479 new homes, have been cancelled, with funding for community housing providers slashed to a measly 750 new places annually. This is a far cry from the ambitious programmes under the previous government, which, while not perfect, recognised the need for a robust public housing stock to address the 112,496 people (2.3% of the population) estimated to be severely housing deprived in the 2023 Census.

#BHN Is the Govt hiding homeless numbers | Cost of living gets worse | Seymour wants karakia gone https://t.co/HW9RyR409y

— Pat Brittenden (@patbrittenden) July 17, 2025

National’s preference for private sector solutions and community housing providers, while starving Kāinga Ora of resources, has left a gaping hole in the housing safety net. Mainstream media, with few exceptions, have been complicit in this silence, generally failing to hold Potaka and the government to account for withholding this report.

This lack of scrutiny allows National to manipulate the narrative, presenting their emergency housing cuts as a success while ignoring the human cost. Worse, the government’s broader pattern of dismantling statistical transparency, evident in their lax tracking of where families go post-emergency housing and cancelling of future Censuses, suggests a deliberate strategy to obscure data as homelessness and other social conditions worsen.

New Zealand deserves better. Potaka’s refusal to release this report isn't just a failure of transparency; it’s a betrayal of the approximately 100,000 Kiwis, including 60,000 Māori, grappling with homelessness. The government’s policies, stricter emergency housing rules, cancelled state house builds, and a punitive welfare system, are driving people to the streets. It’s time for accountability, not obfuscation. But we are unlikely to see any change for the better while National is in power.