Category: Public Media

Source: Radio New Zealand

With the cost of fuel and other essentials rising due to the conflict in the Middle East, the government is looking at ways to ease the cost pressure for those feeling it the most.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis told Morning Report the price increases are extremely tough and affecting all New Zealanders, but said some are feeling it more than others.

“I can’t solve the pain for everyone. The cost of doing that would potentially involve levels of spending that would drive inflation higher, and certainly would put us in a more fragile position in terms of debt.

“So what we are looking at, is there something very targeted and temporary that we could do to assist those workers in particular who are most acutely impacted by these household budget squeezes?”

Willis said she doesn’t want to see a situation where people can’t drive to work, and has instructed the IRD and Treasury to come up with a package that could be implemented with urgency ahead of the Budget, but Cabinet will ultimately decide on timing.

Willis wouldn’t say what the income thresholds would be, but said the package would take into account household income and number of children.

“We’re also looking at forecasts at the moment and putting together a budget, all of which involves questions that we have to address on the way through. But I do want to stick to our fiscal strategy,” Willis said.

Fuel supply disruption

Willis also discussed rising fuel prices, and said the message remains the same, “this is not the time to panic, we’ve got plenty of fuel in the country and on its way.”

On Thursday, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon acknowledged a “big shift” in the government’s messaging around the war in the Middle East, warning New Zealanders the fuel situation could get worse before it gets better.

Willis said the government was preparing for scenarios where supply from Singapore and South Korea, where New Zealand gets petrol, diesel, jet fuel from, could be disrupted.

“We know that they are having challenges getting crude oil out of the Middle East and so are either reducing the amount of products they’re refining or, in South Korea’s case, looking to prioritise domestic customers.

“So what we’re anticipating is there could be a point down the line where that makes it harder for our fuel importers to get the refined products they need out of Asia.”

Willis also defended the government’s LNG plans, despite the attacks on Iran’s South Pars gas field and [https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/590133/oil-prices-surge-stocks-sink-on-energy-shock-fears Qatar’s Ras Laffan.

Willis said the focus was still for New Zealand’s energy to be “largely renewable”, but having LNG as a back up remained the government’s strategy.

Not our conflict

Willis said the fighting in the Middle East was “not our conflict”, and reiterated calls for a humanitarian end.

“What we want to see is that the rules of international engagement are upheld, which involves not targeting civilians and protecting human life.

“We are not involved, we haven’t been asked for authorisation, we haven’t been asked for support, we haven’t been asked for assistance.

“Our opinion has not been relevant to the events that are unfolding in that region of the world.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/government-looking-at-ways-to-assist-families-with-increasing-costs-due-to-middle-east-conflict/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Higher fuel costs mean higher transport costs, and that means higher prices across the board – and that’s a hard pill to swallow for Kiwis three years into a cost-of-living crisis.

Kiwis are already feeling the expensive ripple effects of the war in Iran – and economists are warning that the real impact is only just beginning.

What started as a distant geopolitical conflict has quickly landed squarely on our country’s economy, driving up fuel costs, squeezing household budgets, and threatening to slow growth.

If it continues, New Zealand could be staring down the barrel of another recession.

“So this sort of shock, if it gets worse, will definitely increase the risk of a recession here,” Kiwibank chief economist Jarrod Kerr tells The Detail.

“And we have only just gotten out of recession, so to fall back in would be horrendous for households and businesses.”

At the centre of the crisis is oil.

Global prices have surged past US$100 a barrel as fighting disrupts supply routes through the Strait of Hormuz – a chokepoint for about 20 percent of the world’s oil.

And for New Zealand, which imports almost all of its fuel, the effect has been immediate.

Petrol prices are already climbing rapidly, with forecasts that they could push toward $4 a litre – or higher – if the conflict escalates.

And when fuel costs rise, everything that relies on transport follows – from groceries to clothing to construction materials.

“The direct impact that we are seeing right now is the rise in petrol prices, and that affects, I would say, every household, particularly those on lower incomes who are forced to drive to work,” Kerr says.

“It is just another cost that they have to wear. And they have been in a cost-of-living crisis for the past three years.”

He warns that the conflict could push inflation higher while slowing growth, with Kiwi households already tightening spending, cutting discretionary purchases, and reducing travel and fuel use. Delaying big buys and trading down to cheaper brands are likely on the horizon.

“Yes, we are going to see a spike in inflation, but what I don’t agree with is the commentary that that automatically leads to a rate hike. I disagree.

“That is only going to put greater pressure on a household that is already under pressure. That would be the exact thing not to do … for me, the bigger risk is that households get hurt, the economy doesn’t recover, and the central bank may be needed to come in and provide support.”

He said economists entered the year “quite optimistic, because we had been banging the table for a long time, because the Reserve Bank had not cut interest rates to a level that was actually stimulatory and helpful for the recovery.

“They finally got there in November last year, took them far too long to get there, but they got there. We came into this year saying, ‘this is it, we are going to recover, the settings are about right, let’s go, c’mon let’s get some growth happening’, and mid-way through that sentence, we were cut off with missile strikes in Iran.

“It’s just another international shock that we have to deal with, and it’s just another headwind that all households and businesses have to face into.

“It’s hard for households to pay the food bill and power bill, which is up 35 percent on the year, petrol prices, which will be up a similar sort of amount, it is very, very difficult.

“We need to see policymakers stepping in to help, not hinder. So calls for rate hikes from the RBNZ [Reserve Bank] are tone deaf.”

On this episode, The Detail also speaks to Retail NZ chief executive Carolyn Young, who says retailers and consumers throughout the country are feeling the fallout of the war.

She says prices for goods and services will increase and “we will see that relatively soon”.

“We are seeing increases in insurance … increases in the fuel to get the ships to New Zealand,” she says. “Those additional costs are being passed on to the retailers and, at some point, those costs will be passed on to consumers.”

She says, right now, it’s “a really uncertain time for everyone”.

“Ultimately, uncertainty is not good for business. And I think that’s the thing we have to remember, and right now everyone is in a state of flux and uncertainty.

“And for any business owner, whether you are a retailer or other business, it’s going to have an impact on your sense of how you are going to move forward, and therefore it will have an impact on your profitability and ability to spend money in other areas.”

She fears some businesses might not survive the war.

“It will be difficult for people, and we will see some people who are perhaps a bit more pessimistic about what the future holds and may decide to close the store, and there will be others who will try to hang in there.”

She says recovery will depend on how long the conflict lasts.

Economists say a short conflict will see a sharp but temporary spike in prices, while a prolonged war will mean sustained inflation, weaker growth, and reduced spending.

And an escalation? Enter the risk of recession.

For now, the message from economists is simple: New Zealand may be far from the conflict, but it is not insulated from its consequences, because a war a world away involving oil doesn’t stay overseas for long.

Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here.

You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/iran-war-hits-kiwi-wallets-hard-as-economist-warns-of-another-recession/

Source: Radio New Zealand

China is warning that alliances will likely escalate rather than de-escalate tensions and “spread rather than limit the conflicts”.

The warning delivered by its ambassador in a hardhitting speech on geopolitics in Wellington on Thursday came as New Zealand was getting closer to Australia and Australia was getting closer to the United States on defence.

The speech closely followed China accusing the trans-Tasman allies of “arrogance” in a clash over military manouevres.

That in turn came on the heels of the allies releasing a new ‘Operationalising our Alliance’ joint statement aimed at “being able to operate seamlessly as an increasingly integrated, combat capable Anzac force by 2035”.

Canberra for its part under a separate alliance was “committed to deepening cooperation through accelerating and expanding joint defence initiatives, shared investments in new capabilities and industrial base integration” with the US.

This all came a few weeks after US President Donald Trump announced a big shift in how his administration would sell weapons.

Gone was what his directive called the “partner-first arms sales approach”, newly arriving was an “America First” arms export strategy, where allies would be encouraged to buy US-made weapons as an explicit powerful foreign policy tool that prioritised partners “that have invested in their own self-defense and have a critical role or geography for executing the National Security Strategy”.

‘I haven’t seen New Zealand miss out’

Would the new ‘America First’ priority partner list impact New Zealand? It had favoured status in Anzac, ANZUS and Five Eyes, but is not part of AUKUS.

RNZ put that question to L3 Harris, a top 10 US defence contractor that just did a billion-plus-dollar partnership to add missile rocket motors to the US “arsenal of freedom”; signed a defence collaboration deal with Saudi Arabia last month; and supplied advanced comms gear to the NZ navy and army.

“In my career, I haven’t seen New Zealand miss out because they weren’t perfectly aligned with the way that the administrations have played,” said Alan Clements, L3 Harris vice president for Australia and New Zealand.

“Never once have I heard, either when I was in the military or outside the military, that New Zealand was to be excluded from anything.

“Yes, there’s policies … but there are also carve-outs for that, there are waivers.

“From our company perspective, nothing that’s been said inside those policy settings has stopped us being able to work with New Zealand and deliver capability with New Zealand.”

The country was not part of AUKUS Pillar Two – a military tech sharing arrangement for Australia, the US and UK – but was not missing out, Clements said. “New Zealand wouldn’t miss out because New Zealand being part of the Five Eyes [intelligence grouping] would be able to get access to that as we go.”

Share and share alike

In Australia, defence media reports had foreseen “major implications” from Trump’s America First arms move.

It beholdened the Pentagon to put a MAGA lens over the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) programme, which was the place where New Zealand went arms shopping. The government began talks under the FMS last August to buy $2 billion of naval Seahawk helicopters.

The Seahawk deal showed how the closer the three militaries got, the closer they were likely to get. “The Seahawk helicopter, operated by Australia and the United States, is the preferred helicopter,” an aide memoire to Cabinet last year.

“The ability to leverage American and Australian supply chains and through-life support arrangements … makes this the most cost-effective and durable helicopter. It means Defence does not need to fund the integration and certification of essential military equipment and systems” – plus aircrew would be interchangeable.

Clements said the defence industries on either side of the Tasman had to align to rein in costs by preventing double up.

“We are now seeing more and more that we’re working closer together, particularly when it comes to capability alignment.”

L3 Harris had seven people working in New Zealand, compared with over 500 across the Tasman.

“But we work with other New Zealand companies and they do the work either as a subcontractor or sometimes as a prime for us where we try to build that capacity and capability within New Zealand itself, rather than import.”

‘Entanglements’

In the higher, weightier world of geopolitical alliances, who was in control?

China’s ambassador Wang Xiaolong warned on Thursday that alliances were “entanglements” where everyone would end up less secure.

“The next non-solution I want to debunk is military alliances, which we believe is, often a de-stabiliser rather than a stabiliser for the world.

“These alliances, by definition and by design, are meant to win wars rather than to keep the peace,” he told the Wellington Club.

Defence Minister Judith Collins, asked by RNZ on Thursday where the line was within increased integration, given Australia’s different positions, say, on nukes or the Iran war, said those were foreign policy differences, not defence.

“There’s no risk to our independence,” said Collins.

The existing “enormous” defence integration with Australia went both ways.

“The biggest risk to our independence is to not be closely connected to Australia,” she said.

The 2035 joint statement mentioned “sovereignty” six times.

‘Rocket diplomacy’

The statement also made clear the Anzacs would be using the same weapons more and more; by 2035 the two would “deploy increasingly integrated and interchangeable units”.

Australia and the US would be, too. Canberra recently signed on to spend over $20 billion with the Pentagon and contractor Lockheed to co-produce guided weapons – what Politico called “rocket diplomacy”.

The track to human-machine integation was also becoming well beaten. The US Army planned to deploy its first Human Machine Integrated Formation (HMIF) platoons by 2027, while the NZDF in its new long-term insights briefing made “human-machine teaming” one of four themes.

It was not just about sharing weapons at the pointy end either, but also the data-crunching AI systems behind them that the NZDF told MPs last week would become the number one force multiplier.

AI allowed command-and-control to be integated like never before on the battlefield. The NZDF was experimenting with this in US-led multinational exercises.

Clements said New Zealand’s stance and defence capability plan meant the country would probably want to head down the path of aligning command and control with their allies and partners, in particular Australia.

“That alignment with command and control is important for both countries.

“Australia has gone down a particular path with its command and control, and it aligns and the services have aligned slightly with the way the US do things.

“Those systems that are actually currently being used are not L3 Harris systems at the moment. But if there was an opportunity where they were looking at doing something new, then absolutely.”

Lower level control of, say, a drone could be programmed to “put constraints around what it goes to do, where it looks, [where] the information goes.

“So you can absolutely put constraints around that,” said Clements. Once the data went up to a higher level, that would be a different system.

So, L3 Harris’s product Amorphous that controlled of swams of land, sea and air drones all at once, could be controlled at the frontline, and a separate system sit behind it where the bigger targeting decisions were made.

Lethality on order?

One shift by Collins had been to order Defence to become more lethal.

Defence has been holding ‘early-days’ workshops with contractors to get ideas about drones and the like.

Was the NZDF asking for more lethal and autonomous weapons now?

“I’m not aware of them asking for that from us directly at the moment,” said Clements.

“But yes, as a defence organisation, we will develop capability using all the tools that we currently have to meet the requirements of the lethality requirements of the Defence Force.

“But often we’re not in there trying to beat a door down and say, ‘You need to buy this piece of kit’.

“It’s looking at what they’re doing from a full structure and then having a conversation about, ‘Do you think this would help you in what you do?’”

While Clements has stressed how “autonomy, AI-enabled sensing and unmanned systems” were transforming military capabilities, he told RNZ that autonomy was not a prerequisite for the huge gains in precision and humans could be first in the loop – “at the beginning to hit the button”.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/military-alliances-is-nz-getting-a-tangled-web-or-a-ticket-to-get-in/

Source: Radio New Zealand

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/twinning-the-tauranga-school-with-13-sets-of-twins/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Nearly three decades after Fiona Maulolo was killed by her partner Leslie Parr, he killed again, this time his mother. Maulolo’s sister spoke with National Crime Correspondent Sam Sherwood about the family’s loss, their anger, and the many questions they have.

Tina Maulolo was at home when she heard a knock at the door.

It was June 2024, 27 years after her sister, Fiona Maulolo, was brutally killed by her partner Leslie Parr. A jury had found him not guilty by reason of insanity and a judge ordered he be detained in a special secure unit and not freed without the health minister’s authority.

When Tina got to the front door she saw two police officers.

The officers had some chilling news. Parr had killed again, this time his mother. The officers didn’t go into further details, but warned she may be contacted by the media.

She checked online but couldn’t see anything, and had no way of finding out more information.

It wasn’t until this week, almost two years on, when a suppression order was lifted that Tina learned the full details for the first time.

She told RNZ she’s “pissed off” with the system, has many questions, and wants an independent inquiry into the mental health system.

“It sounds like history repeated itself … Why was he let out?”

The first killing

Parr met Fiona Maulolo in 1996. The pair soon moved into a property in the Hutt Valley.

Tina says she did not know Parr well. She described her sister as a loving mother to her two daughters.

Soon after meeting Maulolo, Parr, who had earlier been made a patient under the Mental Health Act stopped taking his antipsychotic medication regularly and had an “episode” which led to him being admitted to Porirua Hospital.

Parr was described as a man who was “depressed and delusional”, thinking that his father was Satan. He was predicting the end of the world in the year 2000, and said he heard voices telling him to kill himself.

When his medication was reintroduced he began to deny psychotic symptoms.

On the day he was due to be discharged from hospital he seriously assaulted a police officer who was visiting the same ward.

Parr told a psychiatrist he didn’t believe he was to blame “because the constable had looked at him”.

He was then made a compulsory inpatient for six months under the Mental Health Act but nine days later on March 28 1996 was discharged by psychiatrist Linda Astor who hadn’t even seen him. Astor later fled the country and was unmasked as a bogus psychiatrist

Parr was not seen again by mental health services until 15 April 1997 after he was found semi-conscious in a carport at Maulolo’s property.

Three days later, Maulolo was found dead.

A jury found Parr not guilty by reason of insanity. A judge ordered he be detained in a special secure unit and not freed without the health minister’s authority.

A coroner later said Parr’s treatment had been seriously deficient.

Tina says her sister’s death was a “total failure of the system”.

She says the family had concerns about the public’s safety should he ever be released.

“We had doubts. But we left that up to the authority to do what they were supposed to do with him. We were told they were supposed to inform us along the way, if he gets released and what will happen to him, but we never had any contact, nothing.”

The release

Tina says she contacted the hospital where Parr was detained more than 10 years after the killing. She says she was told he had been released to work with his uncle.

“To me at the time I thought, ‘well, heck…’ we were told that he should be in there for basically the rest of his life, and yet, they released him out to family… he can live happily with his family. And my nieces are going through life without their mother.”

To be released into the community after being designated a special patient, requires the sign off of the minister of health, the attorney general and the director of mental health. Parr was released back into the community in 2012. In 2021, his status was changed to being a patient under the Mental Health Act.

At the time of his second killing, he was subject to a Compulsory Treatment Order.

In the weeks leading up to his mother’s death, Parr’s mental health was “rapidly declining,” Justice Karen Grau said.

In May 2024, following an altercation between Parr and a relative he was admitted to a mental health facility.

He was released after about a week on 30 May. In the following days he became preoccupied with the loss of his car keys and was having difficulties with relationship he was in.

He was also using cannabis.

Then on 4 June 2024 he killed his mother, Heather Condon.

Following Condon’s death, two police officers visited Tina and told her Parr had killed his mother.

“They didn’t go into details or anything like that,” she says.

“I had no one to reach out to for more information.”

She says her initial reaction was: “oh my gosh, not again. Why was he let out?”.

‘History repeated itself’

Justice Karen Grau ruled that Parr was legally insane at the time he caused his mother’s death. He was detained in a hospital as a special patient under the Mental Health Act.

Due to suppression orders that prevented publication of both Parr and his mother’s names, Tina was unaware of the extent of what happened for almost two years.

RNZ earlier revealed the case, which had been shrouded in secrecy last year. On Monday, the suppression orders lapsed after the Supreme Court did not grant leave to appeal.

Over the weekend, Tina received a call from a detective who investigated her sister’s killing.

He told her that the suppression orders would be lapsing on Monday.

The detective then sent her a link to an RNZ article about the case which detailed the background.

Then, after suppression lapsed on Monday, she read more.

She says she’s “pissed off with the system”.

“History repeated itself,” she says.

“It’s just so bad … I feel like he killed two people and got away with murder, literally. They claim he’s mental, obviously they thought he was fine to release him out to the public, and then look at what happened.”

Tina says she holds the mental health system responsible for “innocent lives being lost due to their incompetence and neglect.”

“If the health system did the proper thing, and kept him inside then that would never happen to [Condon],” she says.

“How come they didn’t pick up on any signs if they know what they’re supposed to be looking for? They release him out, thinking that he’s all good … how come they can’t pick up different signs of someone that’s not well?”

Tina says Fiona’s two daughters are also “angry” with what has happened.

“They just feel like he’s getting away with no accountability… no one is taking accountability for it.”

An external review of the care Parr received is being finalised.

Tina wants authorities to take action and adopt all recommendations the review finds.

“They can’t just say, ‘yeah, okay, we’re gonna do it’… they really need to show that they will do it, or someone needs to overlook it, that they are going to implement whatever those things are.”

Chief victims advisor Ruth Money said on Monday the case was “heartbreaking and preventable”.

When RNZ first revealed the case she called for a Royal Commission of Inquiry into forensic mental health facilities.

On Monday she said she stood by those calls.

Tina doesn’t believe Parr should have ever been released.

“He shouldn’t be out again. But I wish he would be in prison, not in mental health.”

She says an apology from authorities would do little for the family.

“Nothing will change or bring Fiona back. Any apology at this stage we consider will achieve nothing.

“However, actions do speak louder than words. We wholeheartedly agree with chief victims advisor Ruth Money, that mandated recommendations to come out of this inquiry hopefully will provide greater safety for patients and communities and hopefully to restore trust in the mental health system.”

Tina becomes emotional when asked to describe the impact that Parr’s killings have had on her family.

“She’s missing out on her grandchildren…,” she begins before pausing.

“Her grandchildren are never going to meet their grandmother.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/familys-anger-after-man-who-killed-nearly-three-decades-ago-kills-again/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Disgraced former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming claimed leaking of information about police investigations into him had been “deliberate and well-informed” and was intended to “portray me in the worst possible light”.

The claims were made in an affidavit by McSkimming last year in support of an application for an interim injunction relating to the nature of the objectionable material found on his work devices.

The affidavit reveals how McSkimming found out about child sexual exploitation and bestiality being discovered on his devices, his brief resignation letter and the “overwhelming” effects of leaks about the investigation.

He also said his understanding that information about the police investigation was being tightly held, played a “significant role” in his decision to resign.

“I was conscious that the fewer people saw the reports, the lower was the risk of the information leaking to media.”

RNZ requested access to McSkimming’s affidavit last year and was granted access this week.

Do you know more? Email sam.sherwood@rnz.co.nz

In the affidavit, McSkimming said he was suspended with full pay on 23 December 2024 while police investigated allegations made by a woman known to him. The woman, who has name suppression, was referred to as Ms Z in the Independent Police Conduct Authority’s scathing report into how police responded to her allegations of sexual offending.

“I denied and still deny those allegations,” McSkimming said in the affidavit.

“Details of police’s first investigation were swiftly leaked to media, and have been the subject of media coverage.”

The second police investigation

The affidavit included an email by Detective Superintendent Darryl Sweeney from 28 March last year informing McSkimming’s lawyer Michael Heron KC there was a “new investigation into additional potential criminal conduct”.

“This new investigation was initiated in December 2024, following alerts received by the Cyber Security Centre’s Insider Threat Programme (ITP) regarding activity associated with Mr McSkimming’s New Zealand Police issued computer laptop and/or police issued Apple iPhone.”

Sweeney said police were seeking further search warrants.

“In terms of clarity the data obtained to date is from New Zealand Police network cached data.”

Police digital forensic specialists were investigating a “significant number of explicit web searches” made by McSkimming over a period of about five years.

“These searches bypassed web proxy rules via cached Google images. For clarity, logging records show that Mr McSkimming’s username JMG700 was logged onto these devices, on the NZ Police network or remotely connected, often (from initial indications) in the workplace.

“The initial analysis indicated attempts by your client to access likely objectionable material in terms of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, including images involving borderline child exploitation, and bestiality.”

The Digital Forensics Unit in Christchurch was investigating the exact nature and scale of the searches.

“In terms of fairly informing your client, the scale and prevalence of the searches is considered ‘prolific’ over the five-year period.

“The analysis indicates that it is likely your client accessed actual objectionable imagery. Police will take such further steps as are considered appropriate. As part of the new criminal investigation, I will be in contact in due course with a request to interview your client with reference to the relevant material.”

Sweeney said the Public Service Commission (PSC) had been informed.

Heron replied on 1 April. He referred to “serious concerns” he had raised about the legality of police’s first warrant at McSkimming’s home.

“The warrant was unreasonably broad and, in a number of respects which I set out, its scope was too broad to be lawful.”

Heron requested information in relation to the second investigation.

He requested that police provide no further information to anyone beyond the investigation team “while the legality of the searches that have given rise to the launch of this second investigation remains a live issue between us”.

“Naturally, the subject of this latest investigation is sensitive. I am cognisant that details of the first investigation were leaked to the media.

“If Mr McSkimming’s privacy is breached in respect of this investigation, he reserves all rights to take action against the person or persons involved in the breach.”

In response to Heron’s questions about police protocols or policies regarding searches of electronic devices, Sweeney wrote: “I expect your client, as chief security officer, is familiar with the relevant policies and protocols…”.

However, he sent a copy of the police instructions on information security.

Sweeney said McSkimming’s devices were yet to be searched. The data obtained was from the police systems/network.

He said police policies made it clear the personal use of police systems was “a privilege conducted at the user’s own risk and may be logged and monitored”.

He declined to give Heron’s requested assurance which he said was “proposed in very wide terms”.

“I assure you, however, that I am mindful of the sensitive nature of the subject matter and of police obligations to act lawfully and with proper purpose.”

Ms Z allegations ‘false and motivated by a desire for revenge’

McSkimming’s affidavit mentions Heron was approached by RNZ on 6 May, who “disclosed correctly the general nature of the second investigation and that it related to material allegedly found on my work devices”.

The following day Heron wrote to Sweeney. He said it was “obvious” the complaints made by Ms Z were “false and motivated by a desire for revenge”.

“It will be clear from your investigation (including from witnesses provided by Mr McSkimming) that [Ms Z] has no credibility behind her allegations. What occurred between them was always consensual and [Ms Z] has conceded that on many occasions. Accordingly, I have advised Mr McSkimming not to attend an interview with you as there could be no credible allegation to answer.”

In relation to the second investigation, McSkimming wished to cooperate with police.

“My advice to him is that until the [Ms Z] allegations and investigation are resolved, he ought not be interviewed by you on the other investigation.”

Heron referenced the contact from RNZ.

“The source of that could only have come from NZ Police (directly or indirectly). I am sure you will agree that is deeply troubling. I would be grateful if you could ensure that this does not happen again (and I reserve the ability to take steps in respect to this breach).”

On 9 May, the Deputy Public Service Commissioner Heather Baggott wrote to McSkimming’s lawyers about his fitness to remain in office.

The email included an executive summary of a forensic report by police’s cyber security manager.

“This Confidential Police Report was the first information provided to me that described how police had searched any of my devices,” McSkimming said.

Also attached was a pre-submission classification from the Deputy Chief Censor.

“The information received from police indicates that you have used your work devices to access pornographic material and that that access includes searches for and access to images involving child exploitation and bestiality. The information received indicates that there has been extensive use of your devices for these purposes, and that searches for this material date back to July 2020,” Baggott said.

Baggott said the information received called into “serious question” McSkimming’s fitness to remain as Deputy Police Commissioner.

“In coming to the preliminary view expressed above we have put to one side any question of whether the activity reported to us by Police constitutes criminal offending.

“That is because we view the information we have received as sufficiently concerning in itself to give rise to serious questions as to whether you should retain your position, irrespective of whether it constitutes criminal activity.”

Baggott said the Public Service Commission had briefed Police Minister Mark Mitchell, who agreed with its recommendation to start a process to consider McSkimming’s removal from office.

The commission sought McSkimming’s submissions on the matters raised in the letter.

Those comments, along with PSC’s advice, would then be provided to Police Commissioner Richard Chambers, the Solicitor-General, Mitchell and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon.

Luxon would then consider whether to recommend to the Governor-General that he should be removed from office.

Baggott requested he make his submission by 13 May.

The resignation

The following working day, shortly before 8am on 12 May, McSkimming sent an email from he and his wife’s joint email address to Baggott, cc’ing in Chambers. The title of the email was “Jevon McSkimming resignation”.

“Dear Heather, This letter is formal notice of my resignation from my statutory role in New Zealand Police effective immediately”.

In his affidavit, McSkimming said he was told via his lawyer that the confidential information was being “tightly held” with only police investigators, the PSC and Mitchell having knowledge of the contents of the police report and pre-submission classification.

“This played a significant role in my decision to resign on the next working day, 12 May 2025. I was conscious that the fewer people saw the reports, the lower was the risk of the information leaking to media.

“I thought that by resigning quickly, with immediate effect, it would not be necessary for the Minister of Police, for example, to see the full reports. Nor would it be necessary for the Prime Minister to be provided with the information since neither would be required to make any decision about my removal. As a statutory officer my removal requires the Governor-General to act, on the recommendation of the Prime Minister.”

McSkimming said later that day Mitchell issued a statement which identified “allegations of a very serious nature recently came to light separate to the investigation that led to him being suspended”.

McSkimming said since then he had been “subject of intense media attention”, with reporters coming to his family home and his wife’s church.

The following day RNZ reported that pornography found on McSkimming’s work devices was being investigated as alleged objectionable material.

“The leaking of information about each stage of the police’s investigation into my conduct has been deliberate and well-informed. It is designed to portray me in the worst possible light, even before (or even if) criminal charges are laid,” McSkimming said.

‘Confidentiality has been repeatedly breached’

On 16 May, McSkimming was 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.

In support of the interim injunction, McSkimming said in his affidavit that the effects of the leaks about the investigation had been “overwhelming”.

“As a former police officer I understand the investigation process and the importance of ensuring the confidentiality of any information prior to charges being laid, and then prior to a court hearing. In my case, confidentiality has been repeatedly breached but the latest breaches are the most damaging.”

He said if he was charged, he wanted to be certain he would get a fair trial. He also wanted the option of considering an application for suppression orders.

“In my current situation, with so little information available to me and the police investigation on-going, I am entitled to have all legal options available to me. The publication of any further information about the nature of the allegedly objectionable material purportedly found on my devices will undermine any applications I may be advised to file in future.”

Justice Grau later dismissed his application to prevent the media from reporting that child sexual exploitation and bestiality material had allegedly been found on his work devices.

He pleaded guilty in November to three representative charges of possessing objectionable publications, namely child sexual exploitation and bestiality material and was sentenced to nine months home detention.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/deliberate-police-leaks-to-put-him-in-worst-possible-light-mcskimming-claims/

Source: Radio New Zealand

One of Corrections’ most senior staff is under investigation over allegations of bullying.

RNZ can reveal that Corrections commissioner of custodial services Leigh Marsh is facing an employment investigation.

In response to questions about the inquiry into Marsh, Corrections chief executive Jeremy Lightfoot told RNZ he expected “high standards of all our staff and take any allegations raised about their conduct extremely seriously”.

“Corrections can confirm that concerns have been raised about one senior leader that will be investigated by an external independent investigator.

“The concerns raised relate to alleged conduct around management processes and bullying within the employment relationship.”

Do you know more? Email sam.sherwood@rnz.co.nz

The staff member who raised the concerns with Lightfoot was “being supported while this employment matter is ongoing”.

“As an employer, Corrections must ensure any employment investigation follows the requirements of the Employment Relations Act 2000 and that it upholds procedural integrity. We do not want to compromise this process in any way.

“It is also important our staff feel confident raising any concerns, and as an employer I have a duty of care to ensure the ongoing privacy and wellbeing of those involved.”

Lightfoot said it would not be appropriate for Corrections to provide further details about the employment matter at this time.

“I acknowledge the public interest in the conduct of our senior leaders and Corrections is committed to being transparent about the findings of this investigation at the appropriate time and in line with our obligations under the Official Information Act and Privacy Act.”

He also confirmed three operational deputy chief executives would be undertaking six-month secondments into different DCE roles within Corrections.

“I had already been considering moving the operational DCEs into each other’s areas later this year. This is because I believe these secondments will allow each operational DCE to deepen their understanding of each other’s respective areas so we can continue building a coherent, cohesive organisation. Their employment agreements were developed to allow such secondments to take place.

“The decision to do this now was brought forward to ensure that a thorough and fair employment process for both parties in relation to the above complaint can be carried out.”

He said Corrections had worked hard to “create a culture where people feel comfortable to speak up”.

“Anyone with concerns is encouraged to raise them with me, our Integrity team, or another staff member they trust so we can ensure that appropriate action is taken.”

The secondment sees Marsh move to DCE of Pae Ora.

Shortly before the statement was released to RNZ, Lightfoot sent an email to staff about the secondments and telling them he had been considering the changes for some time.

“However, the decision to do this now has been brought forward following concerns raised with me about one of our senior leaders. I expect high standards of all our staff and take any concerns seriously.”

He said staff would likely see reporting of this in the media.

Corrections Minister Mark Mitchell told RNZ any allegations of this nature were an employment matter for Corrections.

“I have confidence that they will manage them in an appropriate way.”

According to the Department of Corrections website, Marsh became Acting National Commissioner in late 2022 and in 2024 was appointed as Commissioner Custodial Services.

“Custodial Services focuses on the safe, fair, and humane management of those in prison. As Commissioner Custodial Services, Leigh is responsible for ensuring the effective oversight and operational delivery of the Custodial Services national network.”

Marsh became a Corrections officer at Hawke’s Bay Regional Prison in 2005.

“During his time in the custodial environment, he has held management positions and oversaw the delivery of rehabilitation programmes across multiple prison sites.

“Since then, Leigh has held roles advising on prison practice, risk management, prison safety and criminal justice system innovation. He has also held responsibility for operational teams delivering electronic monitoring, community and custodial frontline services, and incident management.”

Corrections said Marsh was “passionate about delivering a safe and effective prison system and equitable access to justice for all New Zealanders”.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/bullying-allegations-see-senior-corrections-staffer-leigh-marsh-under-investigation/

Source: Radio New Zealand

In the early afternoon of 19 March, 2025, a small group of the country’s most powerful ministers joined an online meeting to discuss the future of 180,000 New Zealand workers.

Forty-five minutes later, they logged off having made decisions that would impact women’s earnings for years to come.

Those choices formed the backbone of the government’s overhaul of the once “world-leading” Equal Pay Act – retrospectively stripping nurses, teachers, carers and other female-dominated workforces of the right to pursue pay equity claims under the existing law.

Within five weeks of that meeting, Parliament had passed the Equal Pay Amendment Act under urgency – a move the people’s select committee last month described as “a flagrant and significant abuse of power”.

The legislation was announced then passed all stages of Parliament within three days in May, meaning the public had no opportunity to make submissions through the usual select committee process.

Dozens of in-train claims were stopped. The rules governing future claims were significantly tightened. And $12.8 billion originally earmarked to fix decades of systemic gender discrimination was instead returned to the Crown’s Budget allowances.

The changes severely curtailed the ability of workers in predominantly female industries to prove their work had been historically undervalued. In some sectors, unions said the new law may make future claims almost impossible.

NZEI Te Riu Roa, which had spent four years working on a pay equity claim covering tens of thousands of education workers, warned the new framework effectively shut down any pathway for many education roles to ever achieve pay equity.

“For teacher aides, winning our claim was huge. Women were giving up second jobs and getting to spend time with their families – that was the most amazing thing,” said teacher aide and NZEI negotiator Ally Kingi.

“But the new law cuts out every single person who is a teacher in the country from making the same claim. Primary, secondary, early childhood, te kura, principals, everyone. And teacher aides – whose pay has already slipped backwards – won’t get a review.”

Documents obtained under the Official Information Act show that the most consequential decisions in the Equal Pay Act overhaul were made during that 45-minute March meeting. In several cases, ministers chose to implement harder thresholds than officials had proposed, tightening the law even further.

The government said the changes were necessary to ensure the pay equity system focused on genuine cases of sex-based discrimination and remained sustainable for taxpayers.

But the detail of how ministers reached their decisions – what evidence they relied on, what modelling informed the most restrictive changes, or why the final law was made harsher than officials recommended – remains hidden.

Despite repeated Official Information Act requests, the 19 March meeting remains, in large part, a black box.

How pay equity became law

To understand the impact of that March meeting, it helps to step back.

The Equal Pay Act was originally passed in 1972 and intended to eliminate gender-based wage discrimination – ensuring women were paid the same as men for doing the same job.

Over time, the issue shifted. The problem was no longer only women being paid less than men in identical roles. It was that work historically performed by women – caring, teaching, cleaning, administration – had been systematically undervalued compared to male-dominated occupations requiring comparable skill, effort and responsibility.

That broader concept is known as pay equity.

In 2014, the courts confirmed in the landmark TerraNova case that the Equal Pay Act allowed workers to argue their jobs had been historically undervalued because they were mainly performed by women, including by comparing their roles to those beyond the immediate workplace.

In response, a Joint Working Group – convened under a National government and including unions, business and officials – spent two years designing a process for assessing pay equity claims. Their recommendations formed the basis of the 2020 amendments to the Act.

The 2020 model created a structured process where a claim could proceed if it was “arguable” that the work in question was predominantly performed by women and may have been historically undervalued.

Once a claim passed that threshold, the parties would identify “comparators” – male-dominated occupations requiring similar levels of skill, responsibility and working conditions.

Comparators could be drawn from outside the employer or even the sector if necessary.

The low threshold was meant to allow claims to be investigated rather than filtered out early.

Cross-sector comparators were permitted because, in many female-dominated industries such as aged care, administration or early childhood education, there are simply no male-dominated roles within the same workplace to compare against.

If undervaluation was established, employers were required to negotiate pay adjustments.

By 2023, settlements had been reached for nurses, midwives, care and support workers and others. For many, the pay increases were life-changing.

“We had women who could finally afford to have their grandchildren for the holidays because they could buy food for them, women who could at last buy a lawnmower, or book a flight,” NZEI’s Kingi said. “All these women were able to live their lives, to relax. And that’s what is right and just.”

‘Significant concerns’ about cost

While the settlements were widely celebrated by workers, officials inside government were increasingly focused on their cost.

As early as November 2023, the Equal Pay Act, once described internationally as ‘world-leading’, was being framed internally not as a human rights mechanism correcting structural discrimination, but as a fiscal exposure problem.

Treasury and Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) briefings warned about the cost and structure of pay equity claims, including the idea the regime was “too permissive”.

In its first briefing to the incoming minister, MBIE said questions had been raised about processes for decision-making and the fiscal consequences of pay equity settlements.

Officials later argued the system provided little incentive to “negotiate hard”, pushing costs higher.

Treasury warned that pay equity costs were being treated differently from other wage pressures because of their size and uncertainty, directly affecting the Crown’s operating balance.

It expressed “significant concerns” about the comparators used in the care and support workers’ claim, suggesting they may have produced significantly higher cost outcomes.

Officials described New Zealand as “unusual” in allowing comparators from outside the workplace or sector, and questioned whether the threshold for claims was too low.

MBIE suggested other ministers may wish to discuss options to change current processes, and said it could provide further advice if required.

Pay equity specialist Amy Ross, the former head of the pay equity taskforce, said those briefings exposed what she said was a longheld, ideological view among the agencies: that pay equity was nothing but a risk to the government.

“They never thought about it for what it really was – an evidence-based market correction that had massive downstream benefits for communities – money flowing into households, services improving and the country retaining workers,” Ross said. “They only ever talked about the ‘cost’ of pay equity. But the ‘cost’ is women subsidising labour. It’s actually a cost to women.”

Enter Brooke van Velden

The agencies’ briefings clearly resonated with the new minister for workplace relations. In the first week of December 2023, Brooke van Velden, an ACT MP, sought a briefing on what she called “pay parity”.

Officials responded with a screenshot from MBIE’s website explaining that pay parity and pay equity were two different things, and both were legislated requirements in the Equal Pay Act.

Van Velden’s advisory followed up with questions wanting to know the broader “consequences” of the interaction between pay parity and pay equity.

On 29 January, 2024 van Velden wrote to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon questioning the pay equity framework and signalling her interest in reform.

At that point she was yet to have a full briefing on pay equity.

The letter was not released under OIA, but van Velden said she had written that she was concerned about the “robustness and reliability” of comparing remuneration between different professions in a bargaining framework, and that the pay equity bargaining system had resulted in “significant labour market distortions and high costs to the Crown”.

Critics noted the letter’s framing – painting comparators as distortive, bargaining as unreliable – echoed longstanding BusinessNZ concerns and earlier National Party proposals from 2017, which had included a tighter hierarchy of comparators and a higher threshold for claims.

In March, van Velden received her first full briefing on the issue – a MBIE PowerPoint presentation titled “Pay equity: a short history”.

This briefing was highly critical of the system, pointing to the 2020 amendments by the previous government as the problem. It also framed New Zealand as an international “outlier” for allowing cross-sector comparators; and casted doubt on the validity of current claims, particularly the low threshold for entry to the system; and the way comparators were chosen.

In response to follow-up questions about the comparators from van Velden’s advisor, officials noted anecdotal examples of fisheries officers, corrections officers and customs officers being used repeatedly as benchmarks.

These anecdotes that would later become central National and Act Party talking points after the pay equity reform was announced, were held up as an example of a “wasteful” system that had gone too far.

Fuel on the fire

If ideology lit the fire for reform, the fiscal implications provided the fuel.

Soon after the 2023 election, Finance Minister Nicola Willis also began receiving detailed briefings from Treasury, focused on the scale of potential pay equity liabilities.

The largest claims, particularly teachers and care and support workers, were expected to cost the government – as employer – billions of dollars, Treasury said.

Officials assumed pay increases of roughly 20 percent based on earlier settlements.

Throughout 2024, Willis sought increasingly detailed information about the potential fiscal exposure: how much funding had been set aside, how claims might evolve and how New Zealand’s system compared internationally.

Treasury estimated that $3.193 billion from the public-sector pay equity contingency alone could be returned to Budget allowances if the system was changed.

Across the public and funded sectors combined, as much as $12.8 billion could be freed up, significantly boosting the government’s books.

By the end of 2024, Willis had made the case to Cabinet that changes were needed. Cabinet’s Strategy Committee then directed officials from MBIE, Treasury, the Public Service Commission and Crown Law to develop options.

In late February 2025, ministers were presented with several approaches – ranging from pausing the system to redesigning it entirely.

But a full redesign was expected to take more than a year. Instead, ministers chose speed.

By 4 March, officials had been directed to prepare amendments for Cabinet approval by the end of the month, just in time for Budget 2025.

A draft Cabinet paper was circulated on 14 March. Five days later, ministers met to finalise the policy settings.

19 March

Attendance records show six ministers and a group of senior officials joined the 2pm online meeting on 19 March.

Those invited included Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden, Finance Minister Nicola Willis, Public Service Minister Judith Collins, Health Minister Simeon Brown and Women’s Minister Nicola Grigg. Education Minister Erica Stanford was overseas but sent a staff member.

Officials attending included MBIE chief executive Carolyn Tremain and deputy secretary Nic Blakeley, Treasury Secretary Iain Rennie and official Struan Little, Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche, associate commissioner Arati Waldgrave and Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) chief executive Ben King.

Together they reviewed the policy options outlined in the draft Cabinet paper.

That draft already proposed significantly tightening the pay equity regime – including raising the threshold for work to qualify as “predominantly female” from 60 percent to 66 percent, introducing a stricter hierarchy of comparators, and limiting the re-raising of claims.

But during the meeting ministers chose to go further.

They lifted the threshold to 70 percent. They also initially discussed a 20-year ban on workers re-raising settled claims, a figure eventually changed to 10 years in the final Bill. And they removed the final tier of cross-sector comparators entirely – meaning workers must now find comparisons within their own sector.

Officials noted the risk that some workforces might not be able to identify an appropriate comparator at all. The change was left anyway.

At the same time, ministers killed all 33 existing claims mid-process, some of which had been in progress for years. Those claims collectively covered around 180,000 workers across sectors including education, health, social services and the public sector.

Pay equity specialist Amy Ross said the changes went further than any framework previously proposed.

“If you cut off cross-sector comparators, you’re effectively comparing historically underpaid work with other historically underpaid work,” she said. “You embed undervaluation.”

By raising the threshold of “predominantly female” from 66 to 70 percent, the government effectively legislated several professions out of contention including librarians, probation officers and – the largest group – teachers, which have a 68 percent female workforce.

NZEI believes that was deliberate. “Why else would you pick that number? I can’t see any other reason for that shifting and they can’t provide any other reason as to why it’s 70 percent,” said Kingi.

Marilyn Waring, the chair of the People’s Select Committee which investigated the change, agreed.

“They would have known the exact percentage at which they lost another claimant group,” Waring said. “I think they were greedy. Those ministers just had dollar signs in their eyes.”

Taken together, the changes fundamentally reshaped how pay equity claims could be brought in New Zealand.

A black box

Documents show what happened immediately after the meeting. Within hours, officials were rewriting the Cabinet paper to “better reflect the Minister’s feedback overnight” and scrambling to gather examples to support the changes.

Emails marked “SENSITIVE” show agencies being asked urgently to confirm that they were comfortable with claims that comparators such as fisheries or corrections officers had been used inappropriately, and to provide examples of “broadly scoped claims” and review clauses that went beyond sex-based undervaluation.

The DPMC’s Policy Advisory Group was heavily involved in the process, and the Prime Minister was briefed repeatedly on progress.

A DPMC official who attended the meeting wrote to MBIE afterwards saying ministers had been “universally impressed” with the “clear answers and direction” provided by officials.

Yet, when RNZ filed Official Information Act requests for the records of the discussion, the paper trail was limited.

Treasury, the Public Service Commission, and the offices of Willis, Brown, and Grigg all claimed they had no contemporaneous minutes, records or notes. Collins and Stanford’s offices refused to release their records. MBIE confirmed an official took handwritten notes but also refused to release them under the Official Information Act’s “free and frank” provision.

Requests for modelling underpinning key decisions – including raising the threshold to 70 percent – produced nothing. RNZ has been unable to confirm if this information exists and is being withheld, or if no such modelling of the far-reaching, late change was considered by ministers before making their decision.

Officials have already acknowledged no Regulatory Impact Statement was prepared for the reforms. The policy was developed within a “severely compressed timeframe”, with limited opportunity to assess evidence or test assumptions, MBIE said.

A spokesman for Willis said the absence of detailed minutes from the meeting was “not unusual for meetings where decisions are recorded via papers”. The papers prepared for the meeting and capturing the decisions taken at it were released and are publicly available online.

In its report released this month, the People’s Select Committee was scathing of the policy development process. As part of its investigation it examined what little material was made public, and found it severely lacking. “No minister was ever fully briefed on the measure’s human rights consequences,” the report said.

“Every piece of information is bite-sized, simplistic and undeveloped – a slide show. No one is ever required to read anything meaningful or comprehensive.”

The committee said the process left serious questions about how ministers were able to assess the impact of the reforms before the law was passed.

“My belief is they don’t want the information to be public because they know they don’t have a leg to stand on because their analysis was so poor,” Waring told RNZ this week. “But of course we should be able to see the evidence.”

A group of unions is taking a High Court case to argue the law change breached the Bill of Rights Act, which Waring believed would flush out further information on the process.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/how-a-crucial-45-minute-meeting-between-ministers-took-pay-equity-claims-away-from-tens-of-thousands-of-women/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Benefit rates are set to rise on 1 April, but there are concerns that they won’t be enough to keep up with the rapidly rising cost of living.

JobSeeker for a single person over 25 will increase from $361.32 to $372.55 a week after tax.

Sole parent support lifts from $505.80 to $521.52.

Supported living for a couple with children increases from $734.12 to $756.94.

NZ Super increases from $1076 for a single person living alone per fortnight to $1110.30.

Benefits are adjusted based on the consumer price index (CPI), which lifted 3.11 percent last year.

NZ Super and Veteran’s Pension rates are adjusted based on changes in net average wages and the CPI.

Isaac Gunson, spokesperson for Child Poverty Action Group, said the increase would only cover the inflation that happened last year.

“Not the specific inflation around food, electricity, other big ticket essential items that families can’t go without, and yet those have all been rising higher than average inflation.”

He said any additional support from the government to help with the current crisis would need to take into consideration the pressures households had already been feeling.

Cost of living pressure had been a problem for many households for years, he said, and things such as food were frequently rising faster in price than other goods.

“It’s a big problem to calculate benefit rates by the average inflation because so many critical essentials that families and especially children need to grow up and live long, healthy lives are the things that are inflating even faster.

“We have called for benefit rates to be tied to wage growth to even out the picture of what sort of support that people need. But even then, bearing in mind that in the last couple of years or so, even wage growth has been quite low.

“There’s a lot of work needed from the government to lift wage growth, to keep families in a position where they’re not having to make cuts at home. And then once wage growth is in a strong place, to be able to index benefit increases to that.”

He said many families’ savings had been eroded over recent years, so a lot of households did not have a buffer to fall back on.

Green Party spokesperson Ricardo Menendez March said benefit levels were not keeping up with the increasing cost of rent, petrol and many food items like vegetables or mince.

“Benefit indexation changes are automatic and do not make up for the fact families are already behind on essential costs.

“Every time there is a crisis people already experiencing poverty disproportionately pay the price … the government needs to protect people experiencing hardship from the current fuel and cost of living crisis by lifting core benefit levels in this budget.”

Infometrics chief forecaster Gareth Kiernna said it was the way the system was set up.

“There’s always going to be a lag – if inflation is running quite hot and it’s stuff that people can’t avoid buying it’s going to cause problems.”

A spokesperson for Finance Minister Nicola Willis said she acknowledged increasing pressure on household budgets and said government was exploring options to provide support to those most affected who had no way of avoiding increasing fuel costs, but did not have the power to mitigate all the consequences of a international conflict.

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/benefit-rates-rise-but-is-it-enough/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Small-town Bay of Plenty is about to be home to a Southern Hemisphere first with big benefits in the fight against potent greenhouse gases.

A new multi-million dollar plant officially opens in Kawerau on Friday to safely destroy harmful synthetic refrigerants.

The Trust for the Destruction of Synthetic Refrigerants, which put $10 million into the plant, said it will significantly reduce that harm.

But it also means the refrigerants won’t have to be shipped offshore.

“The trust has been around since 1993, set up by the industry to deal with CFCs, the old ozone depleting gases,” chairperson Richard Lauder said.

“So we collected them, shipped them to Australia and destroyed them so that we could address the hole in the ozone layer.

“And we’ve since migrated to dealing with their replacement gases, the hydrofluorocarbons, HFCs, which are very high global warming gases.”

Lauder said the Kawerau plant was built to take the risks that come with shipping.

It also means the gases will no longer have to be stockpiled

“Next month we’ll turn the plasma torch on at this plant, it runs at 5000 degrees Celsius – the same temperature as the sun – and we’ll be able to deal with our own waste fluorinated gases here domestically in New Zealand,” he said.

“Some of these gases are 4000 times more potent than CO2, so to put that into perspective if you release 1 kilogram of gas from your heat pump at home, it might be like driving your car for two years in terms of climate impact.

“So we really need to deal with them appropriately and our Trust believed that setting up a plant on shore was the right thing to do.”

Kawerau was picked because of its industrial past.

“I think from the paper industry in particular we’ve got all sorts of skills and capabilities, it’s also adjacent to new geothermal plants so we can use renewable energy to power out plant, I think it’s a great place to put this thing,” Lauder said.

It will permanently get rid of CFCs, HCFCs and HFCs from synthetic refrigerants.

According to the Ministry for the Environment, it is HFCs or hydrofluorocarbons that make up 94 percent of so-called F-gas emissions.

There are measures in place such as limits on bulk HFC imports and pricing schemes under the Emissions Trading Scheme and a Synthetic Greehouse Gas Levy, it said.

The Trust for the Destruction of Synthetic Refrigerants said the new plant will manage gases at the end of their life.

These are found in heat pumps, commercial refrigeration and air condition systems across the country, it said.

It said while there is a place for recycling and claiming the gases, that extended to fully address climate change, ultimately they need to be safely destroyed.

“The 5000 degrees is required because these F-gases are really stable,” Lauder said.

“So the 5000 degrees breaks them down into individual atoms, we inject steam, we add calcium carbonate, and the chemicals that come out the end are actually just water, CO2 that goes to the atmosphere and calcium fluoride salt which is an inert salt which is in fact what’s in your toothpaste, and we can just dump that to landfill until we can find an alternative use hopefully.”

Laura Revell, an atmospheric chemistry professor from University of Canterbury, said there were benefits to no longer having to ship the gases offshore.

“It has high costs associated with it and it creates a lot of greenhouse gas emissions of carbon dioxide and so on, so by being able to dispose of these gases here in New Zealand means that we are reducing our shipping emissions and contribution to climate change in that way,” she said.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/new-multi-million-dollar-plant-in-kawerau-to-become-home-to-southern-hemisphere-first/

Source: Radio New Zealand

The coronial inquiry into the Christchurch mosque attacks has been paused because of other court action.

Deputy Chief Coroner Brigitte Windley last week adjourned the second-phase inquiry, which is examining how white supremacist terrorist Brenton Tarrant came to obtain the guns used in the March 2019 massacres at Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre.

“I emphasise that I do not take this step lightly; I am acutely conscious of the impact of further delays both on Interested Parties and in optimising the preventative potential of this Inquiry,” her decision said.

“At the same time, the circumstances demand that I make every effort to ensure the integrity of the criminal appeal proceedings is not undermined by the work of this Inquiry. I continue to be committed to ensuring the timely progression of the Inquiry and will revisit this decision once the [judicial review] appeal has been determined.”

Windley had sought to call Brenton Tarrant as a witness in the second-phase inquest into the deaths of the 51 people killed 15 March 2019 terror attack.

However, some victims’ families were fighting that decision – first unsuccessfully to the High Court and now in the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal was now weighing that appeal as well as a separate appeal by the terrorist against his convictions and sentence.

The 35-year-old Australian terrorist was serving a life sentence without parole but now wanted the Court of Appeal to overturn his convictions and sentence.

The terrorist claimed he was “forced” to plead guilty to 51 counts of murder, 40 of attempted murder and one of terrorism because he was irrational as a result of torturous and inhumane prison conditions.

Coroner Windley said the second-phase inquiry might create a risk of prejudice to the terrorist.

“Having regard to the risk of prejudice to Mr Tarrant and other jurisdictional challenges raised in the JR appeal in my view the interests of justice require, at least for now, the adjournment of the Second Phase of the Inquiry and inquest,” the coroner’s decision said.

The Court of Appeal heard submissions about the possibility of judicial review earlier this month.

Survivors and victims’ families made their objections to the terrorist being called as a witness heard throughout the second-phase inquest and sought judicial review at the High Court following the coroner’s ultimate decision to call him to face cross-examination.

Justice Jonathan Eaton dismissed the application in October.

Some of the victims’ families then appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal.

The notice of appeal claimed Justice Eaton had made several mistakes in dismissing the application for judicial review.

“The High Court erred in finding community abhorrence and the second respondent’s convictions were not proper considerations for a coroner when determining whether to call him as a witness for cross-examination at an inquest into the deaths of 51 people in relation to the 15 March 2019 Christchurch Masjidain Attack,” the notice said.

The victims’ families were appealing Justice Eaton’s entire decision.

The Court of Appeal heard the terrorist was a witness “like no other” and should not be allowed to give oral evidence at an inquest into his victims’ deaths.

Last month the court also heard the terrorist’s attempt to overturn his sentence and conviction.

The white supremacist left 51 people dead or dying in little over 15 minutes after taking an arsenal of semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and incendiary devices to the mosques as worshippers marked Jumu’ah – the most significant prayer of the Muslim week – and opening fire.

The terrorist initially pleaded not guilty in June 2019 to 51 counts of murder, 40 of attempted murder and one of committing terrorism.

The Court of Appeal heard he wavered in late July 2019 and prepared to plead guilty before again changing his mind only days later.

In March 2020 he formally pleaded guilty to all charges and was jailed for life without the possibility of parole in August 2020.

The terrorist had 20 working days to file an appeal against his conviction or sentence but the “out of time” application came years later.

The Court of Appeal was now considering if it would allow the terrorist’s appeal to proceed.

Both decisions have been reserved by the Court of Appeal.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/christchurch-mosque-attacks-coronial-inquiry-paused-because-of-other-court-action/

Source: Radio New Zealand

New figures from the Ministry of Justice show fewer people are becoming victims of crime.

The latest results from the annual Crime and Victims Survey showed 28 percent of adults – or 1.2 million people – were victims of crime during the 12 months to October 2025.

Ministry of Justice general manager sector insights Rebecca Parish said it was the lowest figure since the survey began in 2018.

“What’s behind that is we’ve seen decreases in a number of types of crime including violent crime which has come down, and also fraud, like those online scams,” she said.

Data released from the survey last month showed there were 49,000 fewer victims of violent crime in the year to October 2025 than two years previously.

The survey showed from 2018 to 2025, the proportion of victims of crime dropped from 30 percent to 28 percent.

Adults with disabilities were more likely to be targeted.

“In 2025 disabled adults were still significantly more likely to experience crime despite their older age profile. While on average 28 percent of adults experienced crime, it was 36 percent for disabled adults. This rises to 46 percent once their older age distribution is accounted for,” the survey said.

Burglary was experienced by nine percent of households (184,000), down from 12 percent in 2018.

Other household offences, such as trespass and vehicle-related crimes, were also at their lowest levels since the survey began.

“That’s a trend we’ve been seeing for a number of years now, and likely relates to the fact more people are working from home, and there’s been improvements in home security, the accessibility of that and affordability,” Parish said.

However, fewer adults felt safe in 2025 compared to 2018.

In the survey, 25 percent of adults reported feeling completely safe, a slight increase from 24 percent in 2024 but still down from 30 percent in 2018.

Meanwhile, 12 percent of people said they felt unsafe, down from 13 percent in 2024 but still up from 9 percent in 2018.

“That can be influenced by a lot of things, if they’ve experienced things themselves as victims or also media reporting of crime can play a role in people’s sense of safety,” Parish said.

The proportion of adults who were victims of fraud and cybercrime had been on a downward trend since peaking in 2022, though it remained higher at 10 percent (440,000 people) in 2025 compared to eight percent in 2018.

The survey found people were generally more concerned about nationwide crime than crime in their neighbourhoods.

Over three-quarters of adults were concerned about family violence, drugs and dangerous driving at a national level. Locally, fewer than half of adults were concerned about the same issues.

The issues of greatest concern locally were dangerous driving, vehicle offences, theft and burglary.

The  proportion of adults who were victims of violent offences was lower in 2025 (three percent) than in both 2024 and 2018 (four percent). 

“While these results are positive, we are also mindful that behind each statistic is a real person, some of whom have experienced crime and victimisation, and assisted us by providing valuable insights through their responses,” Parish said.

Parish said the survey was important because it covered both reported and unreported crime.

The survey said 36 percent of victims reported at least one incident to the police, and only about a quarter of all crime was reported in 2025.

It said most adults reported having at least some trust in the law system (83 percent) and the justice system (81 percent), however levels of trust varied across groups.

In 2025, just 28 percent of Māori adults reported having high trust in the justice system compared with 44 percent for the New Zealand average and 59 percent for Asian adults.

Police said it was pleased levels of trust and confidence in police remained stable in the results at 69 percent.

Assistant Commissioner Jeanette Park said maintaining trust and confidence with communities was a constant priority for the police, and whilst it was encouraging to see several improvements, there was always more work to be done.

Police said almost three quarters (74 percent) of New Zealanders agreed that police dealt effectively with serious crime, an increase from 70 percent in 2024.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/fewer-victims-of-crime-annual-justice-survey-reveals/

Source: Radio New Zealand

Technology entrepreneur Sir Rod Drury has been named 2026 New Zealander of the Year.

The founder of cloud-based accounting software platform, Xero, was one of seven New Zealanders recognised for their achievements.

Drury co-founded Xero in 2006 and helped develop it into a billion-dollar global company.

He moved to Queenstown in 2019 after he retired as its chief executive.

Kiwibank chief executive Steve Jurkovich said Drury had a track record for turning ambition into action.

“From transforming how small businesses operate and grow across the world, to backing the next generation of innovators and investing in the people and physical infrastructure our country needs for the future, his impact is far-reaching and deeply practical,” he said.

“What stands out most is his commitment to using his success as a platform to enable others – helping more New Zealand businesses to start, scale and succeed.”

Sir Rod’s mahi was helping build a more productive, confident and future-focused Aotearoa, Jurkovich said.

“We’re proud to celebrate him as the 2026 Kiwibank New Zealander of the Year Te Pou Whakarae o Aotearoa,” he said.

Others recognised for their achievements were Lucy Blakiston, the founder of a youth-focused media company, and Dr Alan and Hazel Kerr, who had saved the lives of nearly 800 children in Palestine.

Craig Piggott‘s work in global agritech innovation and Mike Casey‘s contribution to sustainable energy were also acknowledged.

Māhera Maihi was awarded Local Hero of the Year for tackling homelessness and poverty.

The Community of the Year Award went to the Safeguarding Children Initiative in Nelson.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

LiveNews: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/03/20/technology-entrepreneur-sir-rod-drury-named-2026-new-zealander-of-the-year/