Some of those featuring in the political week, from top left: Louise Upston, Judith Collins, Barbara Edmonds and Lester Levy. Photo: RNZ
Analysis - The Reserve Bank's surprise decision to cut the Official Cash Rate was the first good news the government has had in quite a while, and it tried to claim the credit.
The bank's governor, Adrian Orr, announced the rate was being cut from 5.5 per cent to 5.25 per cent because annual inflation was heading back to the 1-3 per cent range.
"It's darkest before dawn and its dawn now," he said, which was taken as an indication there could be further cuts later this year.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon claimed on X (formerly Twitter) that the government had "delivered lower inflation", Stuff reported.
Questioned about that, Orr's diplomatic response was that he was going to stay out of the prime minister's lane.
"Success will always have 1000 fathers, so I don't mind who wants to put their name in," he said.
As Stuff's political editor Luke Malpass put it, the decision reflected a weaker than expected economy in the middle of a recession, a global economic slowdown and government spending cuts that may be flowing through to the economy and putting downward pressure on prices.
It was, nonetheless, the first sign that there's some sunshine ahead for mortgage holders and media reaction was exuberant.
Labour's Finance spokesperson Barbara Edmonds saw good and bad in the cut to the OCR. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Labour appeared to be trying to put a dampener on the celebrations.
Shadow finance minister Barbara Edmonds said it was good news and bad news.
"It is good news because a reduction will ease cost of living pressures," she said in a statement.
"But it's also bad news, because economic growth is slower than expected and a higher peak unemployment is forecast (5.4 per cent)."
After explaining further concerns, Edmonds concluded: "A tiny celebration is not worth the thousands of jobs lost, and the recession forecast to come."
Louise Upston is driving a harsher approach towards beneficiaries who don't measure up in the government's eyes. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Hostile response to sanctions for beneficiaries
The government began the week by setting the agenda with announcements on stronger sanctions for non-compliant beneficiaries and its intention to end the 30-year moratorium on genetic engineering outside the laboratory.
Luxon and Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston put up their case for strengthening sanctions against Jobseeker beneficiaries who don't meet their obligations to look for work.
There were numerous assurances that the safety net would always be there for those who genuinely wanted to work and they said the vast majority met their obligations.
But for those who didn't, life was going to get tougher.
The previously announced traffic light system would start immediately, with beneficiaries graded according to their level of compliance.
Green were good, orange were heading for trouble and red were in trouble.
They said that from early next year more stringent sanctions would come in and there would be a new measure - 50 percent of a benefit could be put on a pay card that could only be used to buy essentials like food and clothing.
Upston argued this was better than cutting a benefit by 50 percent because the cash would still be there to spend.
There's more to it than that and RNZ's explainer 'How will the coming benefit changes be applied' sets it out.
The government wouldn't have been surprised by the responses from Labour, the Greens and beneficiary advocates.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins said there were about 18,000 fewer jobs available than when the coalition took office and they should be focusing on increasing employment, RNZ reported.
"Sanctions don't get people off the benefit and into work if there aren't jobs for them to go to, and at the moment there aren't jobs for them to go to," he said.
Upston was asked about this at the press conference when the changes were announced.
She said sanctions weren't a punishment for those who couldn't get a job, they were there for those who didn't meet their obligations to look for work.
Ricardo Menéndez March Photo: Tom Taylor / RNZ
The Greens' social development and employment spokesman Ricardo Menéndez March said his party would repeal the changes and overhaul the whole welfare system.
"None of those interventions have shown to actually work to help people into employment and the government at the same time has shown little ambition or interest in addressing things like child poverty," he said.
"This is just a government waging war on the poor."
Auckland Action Against Poverty coordinator Brooke Pao Stanley said the changes lacked vision and leadership. "It further punishes people for being poor and it will only exacerbate the issue."
Luxon mounted his defence on Morning Report. He said everyone on the Jobseeker benefit should be prepared to work.
"If you're not prepared to do that, that's not fair, that's not right," he said.
"We're not asking much, we're asking you to get a CV together, show up at a job interview, and importantly meet with your case manager - that's not rocket science, it's not difficult obligations when your fellow Kiwis are helping you out."
Judith Collins has plans for legislation this year on the issue of genetic engineering and modification. Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver
GE back in the spotlight
Minister for Science, Innovation and Technology Judith Collins announced the government would end the ban on the use of genetically engineered organisms outside the laboratory.
It has been in place for nearly 30 years, and was controversial when it was introduced amid fears of irreversible consequences if genetically modified crops were let loose in the fields.
Ending it was a commitment in both the ACT and NZ First coalition agreements.
Collins said she would introduce the legislation this year and it would be passed before the end of next year.
It would be based on similar legislation to that which had been in force in Australia since 2000, including the establishment of a gene tech regulator to manage risks, she said.
"This is a major milestone in modernising gene technology laws to enable us to improve health outcomes, adapt to climate change, deliver massive economic gains and improve the lives of New Zealanders," Collins said.
A document providing information about the changes said risks about gene technology, and how to manage them, was better understood now than when the ban came into force in 1996, RNZ reported.
Professor Mike Bunce, a geneticist at Curtin University in Australia and a member of the government's gene technology steering committee, told Checkpoint that in New Zealand there had been very few field trials of modified plants or animals, which was quite different to advances overseas.
New Zealand had missed out on advances in precision gene editing which had applications such as breeding fruit trees that flowered at a certain time or produced fruit which had a longer shelf life, he said.
Labour and the Greens reacted cautiously, and seemed less concerned than might have been expected.
Neither party ruled out ultimately supporting the move, RNZ reported.
Labour had ordered a review of the legislation while it was in power but stopped short of making changes.
"We need to be sure New Zealanders are actually on board with this… a whole lot of education needs to be done first," said technology spokesperson Deborah Russell.
That could mean Labour will wait to see what public reaction is like before deciding whether to support an end to the ban.
The Greens have previously opposed genetic engineering and biotech spokesperson Steve Abel said he wanted to see much more detail and discussion about the proposal.
"We'd be concerned if it became a laissez-faire regime, it would risk our current GE-free advantage," he said.
"We've seen overseas where there's large-scale GE crops, such as in the United States, some significant downsides - a big increase in herbicide use, for example."
Collins' response was that there would a full select committee process for her bill to iron out any issues.
"I hope they will get on board," she said. "After all, they've told us for many years that we should trust the science - and I do."
Levy handles response to health staffing cutbacks plan
Lester Levy Photo: RNZ
Health continued to be an issue this week although the government kept quiet and let Lester Levy get on with his new job as Health NZ's commissioner.
He was forced to counter an internal staff presentation detailing potential wide scale job cuts for frontline workers to save money.
RNZ reported it had seen a copy of the presentation to senior leadership about "potential cost savings in hospital and specialist services" which suggested a total staff reduction of 4492 including 470 doctors, 1491 nurses, 338 allied staff and more than 2000 managers and administrative workers.
Health NZ has about 78,000 full-time employees and the suggested job cuts would save more than $700 million, according to the presentation.
Levy has vowed there won't be any reduction in frontline services under his watch and that he will bring down treatment waiting times.
He is also tasked with avoiding a $1.4 billion budget blowout, and hasn't yet said how he'll do that at the same time.
His response to the internal presentation was to send a memo to all staff to "set the record straight" on frontline clinical staff.
"For the avoidance of doubt, what was presented is in direct conflict with our thinking and should be dismissed," he said. "The clinical frontline will not be cut or reduced and our plans are to strengthen it."
Levy acknowledged Health NZ had a serious financial problem and as part of the "reset" it needed to live within its budget.
Health Minister Shane Reti said Levy had assured him the proposal did not represent planning for Health NZ's future. "I share his deep disappointment with the way material was communicated."
One the same day the story broke, the Herald reported Levy saying in a speech to a health innovators meeting in Auckland that an urgent overhaul of the health system would be painful and wide-reaching.
"We have to face some very strong medicine as an organisation. We have to live within our means, and we will," he said.
"We are going to bring discipline into the organisation, and we will change whatever needs to be changed."
It's clearly going to be traumatic, and perhaps not just for Health NZ - the government has a lot riding on it as well.
Stuff columnist Andrea Vance said it would dominate the next election.
"The true risk for National is because most people now have direct experience of a collapsing health system," she said.
"Ambulances taking hours, or never arriving. No available GP appointments. Elderly relatives in hospital corridors. Mental healthcare that can't meet need. Long, anxious waits with distressed children in chaotic A&E departments."
Vance's conclusion was that whatever Levy does won't put health services on a sustainable, long-term footing.
"The election debate needs to shift: from 'what will politicians do to fix the health system? To 'how much tax are voters prepared to pay to make it work?'," she said.
And if the outlook wasn't already sufficiently gloomy, Stuff published an article by Roger Partridge, chair of the New Zealand Initiative, headed 'A system on the brink of collapse'.
It was about access to primary health care, which he said was as important to a government's survival as keeping the lights on.
"Yet a quarter of a million Kiwis cannot even register with a local GP," Partridge said. "This isn't a mere statistic - it's a daily reality for thousands of families."
He said there needed to be a deeper examination of why GPs were leaving the profession or cutting back their hours.
"It's about making general practice an attractive, sustainable career choice. This means tackling overwhelming administrative burdens, inadequate remuneration and lack of work-life balance," he said.
*Peter Wilson is a life member of Parliament's press gallery, 22 years as NZPA's political editor and seven as parliamentary bureau chief for NZ Newswire.
