web analytics

A question of trusts

Written By: - Date published: 1:17 pm, August 18th, 2009 - 52 comments
Categories: national/act government, tax - Tags: ,

Here is Bill English in the cocktail tapes talking about Working for Families:

“the reality is if we had been the government, with the surpluses they had, we would have done something similar, like Working for Families… there’s a set of inevitable problems, it’s like physics… If you give people cash [that abates as income rises], they’re going to have high marginal tax rates [or people on high incomes are going to get payments]. That’s it. You can’t get around it. Don thought he could. So did John actually… so the raw choice is, fix the money by taking the money off them… the punters are keen to keep it… The last thing we want is to spend to the whole election with families of four on TV saying ‘Mr Key took our money off us’. So later on we’ll have to have a bit of a sort out”

English was right: you can’t avoid high marginal tax rates if you’re going to give a decent tax break to low and middle income families without well-off families also getting something. It’s simple maths.

The problem is, those high marginal tax rates have encouraged some wealthy families to hide their income in investment properties, companies, and trusts so they can keep on getting WFF and avoid going into the top tax bracket at the same time. It’s a classic rich man’s rort.

Working for Families isn’t the problem. The problem is that mechanisms like trusts can be used to abuse the system. If National really wants to stop some well-off people rorting the rest of us, they should target those mechanisms. As far as I can see, the only reason people use family trusts is to avoid tax (and shove the burden on the rest of us). Clamp down on that. Change the rules so investment properties and trusts can’t be used simply to minimise taxable income.

Unfortunately, National’s tax review group thinks the solution is to get rid of Working For Families altogether and make the top tax rate 23%. That’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Hundreds of thousands of low income families depend on the WFF payments they receive. They would get nothing from cuts to the tax rates over $48,000. A family of four with an income of $50,000 would lose $150 a week. Meanwhile, wealthy people (including the people who are rorting the current system) would get enormous tax cuts – $115 a week for an income of $100,000.

When English has his “sort out”, I hope he will think of all those “families of four” and not take their money away to give to the rich. Instead, he needs to have the guts to stop tools like trusts being used by some wealthy people to rip-off everyone else.

52 comments on “A question of trusts ”

  1. burt 1

    So hang on a minute here, are we saying complicated tax structures can be used to manipulate complex tax rules… wow – who would have guess that.

    I have linked this graph here on the standard before;
    http://nbr.infometrics.co.nz/graphing–ideological-burps-_1038.html

    • Ianmac 1.1

      But can the “workers” take advantage of “complicated tax structures can be used to manipulate complex tax rules”? The beauty of PAYE is its simplicity but for wage/salary earners there is not the same wriggle room as some I know. Farmers are able for example to write off their income so apparently they pay no income tax, and enable their kids to access Student Allowance at universty.

      • burt 1.1.1

        Ianmac

        Yes exactly. But you forget the wisdom of Dr. Cullen – students won’t borrow interest free money to invest….

        • Bright Red 1.1.1.1

          Any evidence that students have maxed out their loan to invest, on any significant scale? (I want more than one of two isolated cases)

        • burt 1.1.1.2

          Bright Red

          Do your own digging. I’m too busy planning my Kid’s OE with interest earned from free money. But hey, I’m probably the only one doing it….. Wharrrrrp – thanks for playing.

          • Killinginthenameof 1.1.1.2.1

            OE to nelson is it?

            $166 a week in living costs and a 1 off of $1000 at the start of the year (if you are willing to lie to study link (you’d never do that would you now Burt?) is all you can get out in cash on a student loan, so I call bullshit.

            • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1.2.1.1

              Yep, investing from the student allowance isn’t possible.

              It is possible for rich parents to minimize their income so that their kids get the student allowance and the savings that the parents get then go back into their investments.

              Oh, that’s right, that’s what this post is about – rich people rorting everyone else.

            • aj 1.1.1.2.1.2

              Exactly, bullshit.
              And if the kid is banking the student loan, they still have to live off cash at some point, guess where that would come from, the parents, grandparents less likely, so use of money foregone there. It all robbing peter to pay paul, but makes a great anecdote. Pity its all bullshit.

            • burt 1.1.1.2.1.3

              Draco

              ASG…. Unlike Labour govt’s not everone pays for everything from todays cash flow.

            • luva 1.1.1.2.1.4

              What about the situation where Daddy would have paid for the fees in the first place.

              Rich Kid A now borrow’s 20 grand for his Bcom over three years. The interest free loan pays for the fees directly but the 20 K daddy was going to spend is invested.

              The interest free student loan has freed up that money. At the end of the three year degree the loan can be paid off in full and any interest earned on Daddy’s 20k is essentially money for nothing.

              Rich Kids say thank you Dr Cullen

  2. Geo 2

    you mean like setting up a trust so you can steal/rort accommodation allowances for renting your own house?Not that he lives in wellington.yeah right.

    • burt 2.1

      Geo

      Yes the culture of entitlement is not restricted to welfare out-patients. The situation here with WFF is an unintended consequence of having tax policy that picks winners and loosers (social engineering).

      • Pascal's bookie 2.1.1

        The situation here with WFF is an unintended consequence of having tax policy that picks winners and loosers (social engineering).

        I’m not sure I follow burt. Mike’s 2.35 is a clear case of social engineering. What do you mean by the term?

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2

        And social engineering that was put in place by the rich for the rich.

  3. And those rich families became rich by working hard and making the right choice.

    Sorry to bring up the word, CHOICE, I know those here hate that word.

    • Derek 3.1

      Brett, wrong argument. It doesn’t matter if these families are rich because they worked hard or because they sold poisoned milk to school children. The point is they’re rorting the system. Don’t you have a problem with that?

  4. Lanthanide 4

    To be honest, I am pretty sure the suggestion of a 23% tax rate has been taken out of context from a vague news report. Peter Dunne and Act are in favour of a set of 10/20/30% band of tax rates, I don’t see why this would suddenly drop to 23% for the top rate to ‘fix’ WFF, which is targetted squarely at those in the middle tax rate.

    No, what I think is they meant the *middle* tax rate which is currently 33% should drop to 23%. That way you are still targeting the middle income earners who are currently getting WFF while easing the high marginal tax rates by virtue of not having tax rebates messing the whole picture up. Of course going from 23% to 38% is a big marginal tax increase too, so that’s probably not the whole picture.

    Yes, this is conjecture on my part, but dropping the top tax rate to 23% to ‘fix’ WFF simply makes no sense. Maybe I’m being unrealistic to expect the MSM to make sense, though.

  5. mike 5

    Always thought WFF should be capped at 5 kids. I am convinced some people breed past their means so they can claim more.
    I have 3 and believe me that’s plenty…

    • Bright Red 5.1

      Did you see the earlier post on the economics of breeding for a business? It doesn’t add up mike.

      You get like $80 a week per child, doesn’t cover the cost of a child, does it?

      Or have you got some evidence to back up your conviction? Something more than class prejudice?

      • mike 5.1.1

        They are obviously not so sharp on economics if they if breed they 8 kids on one income are they?
        They look at the IRD spreadsheet and see $ signs – more smokes and beers eh

        • Shambling Rambler 5.1.1.1

          Are you fucking kidding?

          I have 7 siblings, neither of my parents are Catholic, nor are they ‘breeding’ for the WFF.

          You’re a fucking animal.

  6. Tom Semmens 6

    “…And those rich families became rich by working hard and making the right choice(sic)…”

    Or they could be like most of Auckland’s rich whites – lucky enough to be born into a family whose great-grandfather had a big dairy farm in what is now Epsom.

    And that is the problem with this sort of nonsense. The assumption that no one else contributed to your success is stupid beyond belief. The roads you drive on, the police and doctors and teachers you rely on, the sanitation that keeps you healthy… All of these things contribute to peoples success.

  7. tsmithfield 7

    There are reasons for having trusts that don’t involve rorting the tax system.

    In fact, according to my accountant, any tax benefits from a trust are only legitimate if they are ancillary to some other purpose. For instance, the main reason for a trust maybe to enable personal assets to be to enable smooth estate administration.

    If the trust is set up only for the reason of rorting the tax system, then it is likely to be attacked by the tax department.

    Anyway, the wealthy may not be so inclined to set up tax avoidance schemes if they didn’t see their money being tipped down the toilet by whatever party happens to be in power at the time.

    • Pascal's bookie 7.1

      Good to hear it, Smithy.

      In light of the audits being done on those few welfare recipients getting over $1000/week, I think the IRD should be directed to check out the trusts of the people involved in the WFF rort.

      If all is above board all to the good, but otherwise, what’s the difference between this and welfare fraud. If there is no difference, why are they being treated differently by this government?

  8. TightyRighty 8

    marty, you seem to have forgotten that people got on pretty well before WFF.it is essentially middle class welfare. this site always screams for pay rises for the lower paid, well why should they get it when they have WFF, have to take time of work for the kids etc. why not pay the young childless people who are discriminated against by the tax system those higher wages? thats fair and equitable if your going to take a stand against no WFF and lower taxes all around. oh, and i have no problem with wealthier families using trusts to take advantage of middle class welfare. especially if this site has a collective problem with education subsidies being taken away from those whose welfare payments exceed the average wage.

  9. richgraham 9

    you say “Working for Families isn’t the problem”.
    I think it is the problem.
    When I received WFF for 1 child when I was on a low income it was immediately clear
    to me that this was an irresistible trap – I confidently predicted WFF would increase the birth rate and larger families would result.
    WFF was invented by Labour with the main intention of creating a new set of welfare class, it was a deliberate strategy to increase the number of state dependents, and thus secure a larger group of supporters for the Labour pary at election time.
    It has worked well, we have a vastly increased welfare class, and a lot more children.
    Oddly enough, I think the increase in the number of children is a good thing !

    • Akldnut 9.1

      bitchgraham – what a load of crap!

      I confidently predicted WFF would increase the birth rate and larger families would result.

      Post a link to it creating larger families.

      WFF was invented by Labour with the main intention of creating a new set of welfare class, it was a deliberate strategy to increase the number of state dependents

      WTF! What would national have done?
      Just in case you haven’t read it properly here’s the first few lines of this post

      “Here is Bill English in the cocktail tapes talking about Working for Families:

      “the reality is if we had been the government, with the surpluses they had, we would have done something similar, like Working for Families….

      Don’t that make you sick

      and thus secure a larger group of supporters for the Labour pary at election time.

      If you had thought about the election result, you would have shut up & deleted this!

    • So Bored 9.2

      Rich G, if WFF was an irresistable trap when you claimed for one child (my tax dollars of course, but hey I am generous and I assume your child needy), where perchance are your children numbers two, three etc?

      Did you resist the temptation, therebye proving that the theories of rational materialists wrong, that higher motives might really be at play? Heroically demolishing the sacred shibboleths so loved by new right economists? Well done.

      • burt 9.2.1

        Draco T Bastard

        The fact that National might have done the same is no argument to support the policy as being a good one.

        However I can’t see National crowing before an election that they have a welfare package that 75% of families will get access to – but that’s my opinion.

        Agree wages are too low in NZ. Still who’s going to want to push their wages up when abatement rates against benefits make the aggravation of a pay rise above CPI barely worth the cost of a latte.

        MP’s on the other hand did pretty well throughout the last 9 years. We would have a very different median wage today if the median wage had risen by 9% every year for the last 9 years like the MP’s public CEO’s salaries did. I don’t suspect National will be any different to Labour in this regard over the next few years.

        • Draco T Bastard 9.2.1.1

          The fact that National might have done the same is no argument to support the policy as being a good one.

          Good or not, it’s still needed because there’s no way you could get the capitalists to pay enough in wages. That’s what your tax dollars are being used for there burt – to subsidize businesses who refuse to pay the cost price of living.

    • Draco T Bastard 9.3

      …as wages decrease so the working class will die off
      Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, vol. 1 (probably not exact but close enough)

      WFF isn’t the problem. The problem is that businesses aren’t paying enough wages to cover the costs of living. This forces smaller families (which is good IMO) but capitalism needs a growing population else it will collapse so WFF was needed to counteract peoples propensity not to have children because they can’t afford to. As Blinglish said “the reality is if we had been the government, with the surpluses they had, we would have done something similar, like Working for Families “ – National would have done the same and for the same reason.

  10. aj 10

    “I confidently predicted WFF would increase the birth rate and larger families would result”

    Link to prove this has happened please? 🙂

    Meantime back in the real world…..

    http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/births/BirthsAndDeaths_MRJun09qtr.aspx

    National will never be able to dismantle WFF without introducing some even more complex scheme that will have loopholes as well.
    Oh, right – apart from a flat tax.

  11. burt 11

    Mental note: Do not tell Labour supporters that flagship Labour policies are not working exactly like the glossy red brochure said they were. As a messenger you get shot for delivering the message that the brochure didn’t want you to know about.

    I see nobody has made any comment about the graph link I provided…. Guess that $60K threshold had no effect on tax payer behaviour either…. the graph is BS… yes I get it now.

    • Marty G 11.1

      burt. My point is borne out by your graph – the rich rort the system.

      The solution isn’t to throw out the system and lose all the good aspects of it, it’s to remove the tools for rorting it. Just because the bathwater is dirty, you don’t need to throw out the baby too.

    • burt 11.2

      Marty G.

      Are you suggesting a completely flat tax rate ? Because that is what it will take to stop people working the angles. Don’t forget that if people cap their income at $60K (or the current rich prick threshold) then they are still paying tax on all income till they are classified as rich. If everyone who was working was paying as much tax as them then we wouldn’t have a problem.

      I know Dr. Cullen though the idea behind taxation was to pluck the goose with the least amount of hissing but there is an alternate view that taxation should be fair.

      The key problem with taxation debates is that some people believe it is unacceptable that large tax payers get tax cuts when unemployed people don’t, but as long as we have progressive taxation then the reality of adjusting progressive thresholds will cause this to happen. However if you think that progressive taxation is a broken model because adjustment favour big tax payers then you will not get any argument from me.

  12. Pascal's bookie 12

    “I know Dr. Cullen though the idea behind taxation was to pluck the goose with the least amount of hissing but there is an alternate view that taxation should be fair”

    English, Douglas, and every other politician that you care to mention believes exactly the same thing you ascribe to Cullen.

    I’ll let you in on a non-secret. People have different ideas about ‘fair’ means. They do. They really really do. It’s not a trick, they’re not lying. They really truly have differences of opinion about this notion of fairness. It’s what accounts for politics burt.

    So given that there is this genuine difference of opinion about what ‘fair’ means with regard to taxation policy, what’s the fairest way of deciding what to do about it?

    I don’t know, but I do believe that the method we use at the moment for deciding which opinion should be enforced is the best we’ve managed to come up with so far.

    It’s called ‘having regular elections, in a liberal, pluralistic democracy’. If folks don’t like the current policy, and think it’s unfair, they are free to try and change it. Is it fair to rort that democratically expressed will of parliament burt? Or do you think that would be corrupting that system?

  13. burt 13

    Pascal’s bookie

    I have no argument that different people have different views of fair. Some people think progressive taxation is fair but that lifting top thresholds (which only gives benefits to top tax payers) is unfair. So sure, fair is very subjective.

    Oh, stolen elections are not democratic and neither is telling lies about tax policies to win votes.

    Nobody earning under $60K will pay a cent more income tax – Broken promise within the one year of it being said.
    Only the top 5% will pay this top tax rate – Broken promise the day it was implemented.

    But of course Labour went on in 2002 claiming they had kept all their 1999 election promises and the really weird thing is that some really thick people believed them.

    • Akldnut 13.1

      Hey Burt – My Prediction

      But of course National will go on in 2011 claiming they had kept all their 2008 election promises and the really weird thing is that some really thick people will believe them. 🙂

    • burt 13.2

      Akldnut

      I have no argument with you on that one. Myopic partisan crusaders of any stripe are all of questionable intelligence.

      • Akldnut 13.2.1

        Burt Myopic partisan crusaders of any stripe are all of questionable intelligence.

        Well put, but there was no need to get personal.

        I’m a bit disappointed that you’re lumping me in with the with National and all their short sightedness, whose policies/predictions you spent a large portion of your day defending.

        Would that make you a “Myopic partisan crusader”?

  14. Pascal's bookie 14

    “I have no argument that different people have different views of fair”

    So you agree then this:

    “…but there is an alternate view that taxation should be fair”

    is just a meaningless lump of twaddle.

    And ‘fair’ isn’t ‘very’ subjective, it’s purely subjective. (Randians and certain types of Communist might tell you different, but that’s what makes them mental.)

    Thanks again for your little potted history on what you found awful about the last government. I know you found it shocking. (I’m actually starting to suspect some form of tourettes is in play burt, I understand there are good treatments available to get this sort of thing under control if you ever find it makes life harder for you than life needs to be.)

    But it doesn’t answer my question burt.

    Do you agree that our system of governance is a fairly good one for determining what policies should be put in place, and if so, do you think it corrupt for citizens to rort the system just because they don’t think the system set up by our elected government is ‘fair’.

    It’s about the principle burt, if you can forget about your undying hatred of Labour for just a moment or two, I’d be much obliged.

    • burt 14.1

      Pascal’s bookie

      I, in the main, agree with you entirely PB. The issue I have is that fair taxation and popular taxation are not one in the same. Try selling a top tax bracket like was sold in 1999 to the masses now. Especially try doing it while telling people it will be set for 9 years and by the time it changes the average household income will classify them as rich if it is earned by one person.

      This is where fair in the context of having been elected as part of a popularity portfolio starts to get tricky in that it (the tax policy) is no longer operating in the way it was sold.

      Douglas has a low and flat view of taxation. This is his version of fair. It is a difficult logical argument to say that paying the same percentage of your income irrespective of how much you earn is unfair when we have welfare applied only to the lower income brackets. The current system where the biggest tax payers are entitled to the least welfare benefits is easy to justify with ideology but difficult with reason. However as you say, we get the govt we deserve and it is fair that they implement shitty tax/social policy if we vote for it.

    • burt 14.2

      Pascal’s bookie.

      If National decided that WFF was to be scrapped, GST put to 40% and income tax was to be abolished then by your definition that would be fair. I would say I disagree but because people voted for National I would be wrong. Under your definition, I take it you would say it was fair?

      • felix 14.2.1

        Fine with me if that’s what they campaigned on. As I recall National campaigned long and hard on “tax cuts north of $50 a week” which they’ll never deliver.

        Your hypo sounds more like something ACT would campaign on.

      • Pascal's bookie 14.2.2

        burt, I agree that such a regressive tax syatem would be manifestly unfair. However, if that’s what the elected govt put in place then the way for me to express my opinion about it would be try and get a new govt. It’s not about being ‘wrong’. ‘Wrong’ is for matters of fact, and ‘fairness’ is about opinion.

        I think it would be corrupt of me to use things that are set in place for some other purpose, like say charitable organisations or whatever, to avoid paying the GST. No matter how clever my accountants.

        Just so that we are clear, you agree that rorting the trust system to get WFF and avoid the 39% tax rate is, at best, morally corrupt, and that those that do so should, at the least, be thought of the in same way as those who ‘breed for a career’ and be audited to make sure that everyting is legit?

  15. Draco T Bastard 15

    There is an easy way to fix the rorts of course. Tax businesses and trusts the same as personal income.

    • burt 15.1

      Draco T Bastard

      Same as current personal income or as a flat rate? I despair if you really think companies and trusts could be taxed progressively without distorting the tax base even more.

      • Draco T Bastard 15.1.1

        The tax base is close to flat anyway. Due to GST which takes more as a percentage from those on lower incomes than from those on higher incomes the tax rate is close to a flat 30% (give or take a percentile). So, tell me burt, what distortion are you talking about?

  16. Maggie 16

    Gee, isn’t it great having a National government?

    307 families on welfare are being audited.

    9700 well off families rort the system and the answer is to give them a tax cut so they don’t have to rort it anymore?

    John Key somehow manages to keep a straight face while condemning rich people rorting WFF payments. Rich people rorting accommodation payments are in a different category, apparently.

  17. Meddler 17

    Tax is not the main reason why high net worth individuals (doesn’t that make rich pricks sound all nice?) put their money in family trusts. The main reason is the generously termed “creditor protection’ aka “here’s to you creditors, hahaha!’

    Trust lawyers and accountants would like to think that the law says any property in a person’s trust is not “their’ property (even if they have complete control of the trust); therefore, no one can take it in payment of a debt or on insolvency. (Petrecevic anyone?)

    Secrecy is another big benefit/problem with trusts. Anyone can search on the various public registers and find out who owns what, except that if something is owned by a trust it cannot be traced back to the real owner. One example is how it benefits MPs from all parties. Have a look at the MPs’ financial interests register and there are trusts all over it, i.e. MPs completely avoiding the purpose of having the register.

    There are some other well-known reasons for having a trust. One is to avoid paying for one’s care in a rest home. The rest home subsidy is a minimal benefit that is paid for rest home care for those in poverty and whose families can or will not look after them; it is not an entitlement. Yet lawyers are always advising people to have a trust ready so that if rest home care is ever required the taxpayer can pay instead. Trusts have also been used to avoid child support and to obtain legal aid but these loopholes have been blocked by legislation.

    The above uses of trusts are all rorts and completely overwhelm the moral uses of trusts, such as: administration of estates, charities, family arrangements for sharing property and care of property on behalf of those cannot care for it themselves (children, disabled, absent, etc). Trusts are expensive to set up and have administration costs that can be very expensive, which means they are only useful for very rich people; the rule of thumb with lawyers is $2 million before it is worth while.

    In short, another example of richies using law against the rest of the society.

  18. Swampy 18

    Any time you create a subsidy, people will find ways of rorting it. Can you rort tax cuts as easily?

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Face to face meeting delivers significant progress on NZ-UK FTA
    New Zealand and the UK have committed to accelerating their free trade agreement negotiations with the aim of reaching an agreement in principle this August, Trade Minister Damien O’Connor announced. “We’ve held constructive and productive discussions towards the conclusion of a high-quality and comprehensive FTA that will support sustainable and inclusive trade, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    11 hours ago
  • Government taking action to protect albatross
    New population figures for the critically endangered Antipodean albatross showing a 5 percent decline per year highlights the importance of reducing all threats to these very special birds, Acting Minister of Conservation Dr Ayesha Verrall says. The latest population modelling, carried out by Dragonfly Data Science, shows the Antipodean albatross ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Adoption laws under review
    New Zealand’s 66-year-old adoption laws are being reviewed, with public engagement beginning today.  Justice Minister Kris Faafoi said the Government is seeking views on options for change to our adoption laws and system. “The Adoption Act has remained largely the same since 1955. We need our adoption laws to reflect ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Wider roll-out of cameras on boats to support sustainability and protect marine life
    Up to 300 inshore commercial fishing vessels will be fitted with on-board cameras by 2024 as part of the Government’s commitment to protect the natural marine environment for future generations.  Minister for Oceans and Fisheries David Parker today announced the funding is now in place for the wider roll out ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Plan for vaccine rollout for general population announced
    New Zealanders over 60 will be offered a vaccination from July 28 and those over 55 from August 11, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced today. The rollout of the vaccine to the general population will be done in age groups as is the approach commonly used overseas, with those over ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • New Zealand introduces Belarus travel bans
    New Zealand has imposed travel bans on selected individuals associated with the Lukashenko regime, following ongoing concerns about election fraud and human rights abuses after the 2020 Belarus elections, Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta has announced. The ban covers more than fifty individuals, including the President and key members of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • NZ economy grows driven by households, construction and business investment
    The Government’s efforts to secure the recovery have been reflected in the robust rebound of GDP figures released today which show the economy remains resilient despite the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, Grant Robertson said. GDP increased 1.6 percent in the first three months of 2021. The Treasury had ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Milestone 250th tower continues to improve rural connectivity
    The Government has welcomed the completion of the 250th 4G mobile tower, as part of its push for better rural connectivity. Waikato’s Wiltsdown, which is roughly 80 kilometres south of Hamilton, is home to the new tower, deployed by the Rural Connectivity Group to enable improved service to 70 homes ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Quarantine Free Travel pause with Victoria to lift on Tuesday
    Following a further public health assessment of the COVID-19 outbreak in greater Melbourne, New Zealand’s Quarantine Free Travel pause with Victoria has been extended to 11.59pm on Tuesday 22 June, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins says. It has been determined that the risk to public health in New Zealand continues ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Prime Minister mourns passing of Dr Sir Ian Hassall
    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is mourning the passing of Dr Sir Ian Hassall, New Zealand’s first Children’s Commissioner and lifelong champion for children and children’s health. As a paediatrician Sir Ian contributed to a major world-first cot death study that has been directly credited with reducing cot deaths in New ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • APEC structural reform meeting a success
    APEC ministers have agreed working together will be crucial to ensure economies recover from the impact of COVID-19. Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs David Clark, chaired the virtual APEC Structural Reform Ministerial Meeting today which revolved around the overarching theme of promoting balanced, inclusive, sustainable, innovative and secure growth ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Digital hub to boost investment in forestry
    A new website has been launched at Fieldays to support the forestry sector find the information it needs to plant, grow and manage trees, and to encourage investment across the wider industry. Forestry Minister Stuart Nash says the new Canopy website is tailored for farmers, iwi and other forestry interests, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Government continues support for rangatahi to get into employment, education and training
    Over 230 rangatahi are set to benefit from further funding through four new He Poutama Rangatahi programmes, Minister for Social Development and Employment Carmel Sepuloni announced today. “We’re continuing to secure our economic recovery from COVID by investing in opportunities for rangatahi to get into meaningful employment, education or training ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • NCEA subjects up for consultation
    The education sector, students, their parents, whānau and communities are invited to share their thoughts on a list of proposed NCEA subjects released today, Education Minister Chris Hipkins says. This is a significant part of the Government’s NCEA Change Programme that commenced in 2020 and will be largely implemented by ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Major investment in plantain forage programme aims to improve freshwater quality
    The Government is backing a major programme investigating plantain’s potential to help farmers protect waterways and improve freshwater quality, Acting Agriculture Minister Meka Whaitiri announced at Fieldays today. The Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures (SFFF) fund is contributing $8.98 million to the $22.23 million seven-year programme, which aims to deliver ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • America’s Cup decision
    The Minister responsible for the America’s Cup has confirmed the joint Crown-Auckland Council offer to host the next regatta has been declined by the Board of Team New Zealand. “The exclusive period of negotiation between the Crown, Auckland Council, and Team New Zealand ends tomorrow, 17 June,” said Stuart Nash. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Food and fibres sector making significant strides towards New Zealand’s economic recovery
    The Government is backing the food and fibres sector to lead New Zealand's economic recovery from COVID-19 with targeted investments as part of its Fit for a Better World roadmap, Forestry Minister Stuart Nash said. “To drive New Zealand’s recovery, we launched the Fit for a Better World – Accelerating ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Speech to He Whenua Taurikura – New Zealand’s annual hui on countering terrorism and violent...
    Check against delivery Can I begin by acknowledging the 51 shuhada, their families and the Muslim community. It is because of the atrocious violent act that was done to them which has led ultimately to this, the start of a dialogue and a conversation about how we as a nation ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Cost of Government Southern Response proactive package released
    The Government has announced the proactive package for some Southern Response policyholders could cost $313 million if all those eligible apply. In December, the Minister Responsible for the Earthquake Commission, David Clark announced a proactive package for SRES claimants who settled their claims before October 2014. It trailed the judgment ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • New support to reduce emissions from public building and construction projects
    Government agencies are getting new support to reduce carbon emissions generated by construction of new buildings, with the release of practical guidance to shape decisions on public projects. The Ministers for Building and Construction and for Economic Development say a new Procurement Guide will help government agencies, private sector suppliers, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • He Whenua Taurikura: New Zealand’s first Hui on Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism
    The Prime Minister has opened New Zealand’s first hui on Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism, which is being held in Christchurch over the next two days. The hui delivers on one of the recommendations from the report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on Christchurch masjidain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Speech to inaugural Countering Terrorism Hui
    E aku nui, e aku rahi, Te whaka-kanohi mai o rātou mā, Ru-ruku-tia i runga i te ngākau whakapono, Ru-ruku-tia i runga i te ngākau aroha, Waitaha, Ngāti Mamoe, Ngai Tahu, nāu rā te reo pohiri. Tena tātou katoa. Ki te kotahi te kakaho ka whati, ki te kapuia, e ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Campaign shines a light on elder abuse
    A new campaign is shining a spotlight on elder abuse, and urging people to protect older New Zealanders. Launched on World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, the Office for Seniors’ campaign encourages friends, whānau and neighbours to look for the signs of abuse, which is often hidden in plain sight. “Research suggests ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Farewelling sports administrator and philanthropist Sir Eion Edgar
    Sport and Recreation Minister Grant Robertson today expressed his sorrow at the passing of Sir Eion Edgar – a leading sports administrator and celebrated philanthropist who has made a significant impact both within and beyond the sport sector. “Sir Eion’s energy, drive and generosity has been truly immense. He leaves ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Government to apologise for Dawn Raids
    The Government will make a formal apology for the wrongs committed during the Dawn Raids of the 1970’s. Between 1974 and 1976, a series of rigorous immigration enforcement policies were carried out that resulted in targeted raids on the homes of Pacific families. The raids to find, convict and deport overstayers ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Humanitarian support for Bangladesh and Myanmar
    Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta today announced that New Zealand is providing NZ $8.25 million in humanitarian assistance to support refugees and their host populations in Bangladesh and to support humanitarian need of internally displaced and conflict affected people in Myanmar.  “Nearly four years after 900,000 Rohingya crossed the border ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Poroporoaki: Dame Georgina Kamiria Kirby
    E Te Kōkō Tangiwai, Te Tuhi Mareikura, Te Kākākura Pokai kua riro i a matou. He toka tū moana ākinga ā tai, ākinga ā hau, ākinga ā ngaru tūātea.  Haere atu rā ki te mūrau a te tini, ki te wenerau a te mano.  E tae koe ki ngā rire ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Feedback sought on future of housing and urban development
    New Zealanders are encouraged to have their say on a long-term vision for housing and urban development to guide future work, the Housing Minister Megan Woods has announced. Consultation starts today on a Government Policy Statement on Housing and Urban Development (GPS-HUD), which will support the long-term direction of Aotearoa ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Clean car package to drive down emissions
    New rebates for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles start July 1 with up to $8,625 for new vehicles and $3,450 for used. Electric vehicle chargers now available every 75km along most state highways to give Kiwis confidence. Low Emission Transport Fund will have nearly four times the funding by 2023 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Progress towards simpler process for changing sex on birth certificates
    The Government is taking the next step to support transgender, non-binary and intersex New Zealanders, by progressing the Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Bill, Minister of Internal Affairs, Jan Tinetti announced today. “This Government understands that self-identification is a significant issue for transgender, non-binary and intersex New Zealanders, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Crown speeds up engagement with takutai moana applicants
    The Crown is taking a new approach to takutai moana applications to give all applicants an opportunity to engage with the Crown and better support the Māori-Crown relationship, Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Minister Andrew Little says. Following discussions with applicant groups, the Crown has reviewed the existing takutai moana application ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment (AODT) Court opens
    The Minister of Justice, Kris Faafoi, and the Minister for Courts, Aupito William Sio, have welcomed the opening of a new Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment (AODT) Court in Hamilton. The AODT Court (Te Whare Whakapiki Wairua) addresses situations where substance abuse and offending are intertwined. “New Zealanders have told ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • EU and UK FTAs top of list for first ministerial trip since COVID-19
    Trade and Export Growth Minister Damien O’Connor today announced details of his planned visit to the United Kingdom and European Union next week, where he will hold trade and agriculture discussions to further New Zealand’s economic recovery from COVID-19. The visit will add political weight to ongoing negotiations with both the EU ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Arihia Bennett to chair Royal Commission Ministerial Advisory Group
    Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu chief executive Arihia Bennett MNZM has been appointed chair of the newly appointed Ministerial Advisory Group on the Government’s Response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on Christchurch mosques. “Twenty-eight people from diverse backgrounds across Aotearoa have been selected for the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Speech to the New Zealand Medical Association General Practitioners' Conference, Rotorua
    Ki ngā pou maha o te whare hauora o Aotearoa, kei te mihiTo the pillars of our health system I acknowledge/thank you Ki te ope hapai hauora o roto o tēnei rūma, kei te mihi To our health force here in the room today, I acknowledge/thank you He taura tangata, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Karangahape Road upgrades are streets ahead
    The upgrades to Karangahape Road makes the iconic street more pedestrian and cycle-friendly, attractive and environmentally sustainable, Transport Minister Michael Wood and Auckland Mayor Phil Goff said at the formal celebration of the completion of the Karangahape Road Enhancements project. The project included widening footpaths supporting a better outdoor dining ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Speech to APEC business event
    E ngā tumu herenga waka, ākina ā ngaru, ākina ā tai ka whakatere ngā waka ki te whakapapa pounamu, otirā, ki Tamaki o ngā waka Tena koutou katoa… To the great leaders assembled, who guided your waka through turbulent times, challenging waters and you continue to navigate your respective waka ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Pause on Quarantine Free Travel with Victoria extended
    Following an assessment of the COVID-19 outbreak in greater Melbourne, New Zealand’s Quarantine Free Travel pause with Victoria will continue for a further seven days, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins says. There are now 93 cases associated with the outbreak in greater Melbourne, spread over four clusters. Contact tracing efforts ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Supplier Diversity Aotearoa Summit: Navigate 2021
    *** Check with delivery *** A mihi to all who have contributed to making today a success – starting with you! As you have explored and navigated government procurement today you will hopefully have reflected on the journey of our people so far – and how you can make a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Pukemiro School to close
    Pukemiro Primary School near Huntly will close following years of declining roll numbers, Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced today. “I’ve consulted with the School Commissioner, and this decision acknowledges the fact that the few remaining students from last term are now settled at other nearby schools. “I want to thank ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago