Why the Redundancy Protection Bill matters

Written By: - Date published: 11:00 am, September 17th, 2009 - 23 comments
Categories: workers' rights - Tags: , ,

Over at Red Alert, Darien Fenton tells the story of just one of the thousands of workers currently being laid off without redundancy compensation.

Really brings home how important it is for the Government to back the Redundancy Protection Bill:

Tanya has worked for Chong Newztel for three years and some of her workmates had been working there for up to 25 years.

In January, she and her workmates were told that the company was up for sale and eventually it was bought by an Australian company, Media Monitors.

The workers were told their jobs were safe and not to worry. At the end of March, they were given a termination notice from Newztel. Tanya received hers on the 26th March and her job was due to end 5 days later on 31 March.

This was despite their contract saying they should be given four weeks notice of redundancy.

The new company came in and offered everyone three month fixed term contracts. The workers were told if they didn’t sign the contracts they could leave immediately because they would be trespassing and they signed, because they believed they had no other option.

They were repeatedly told that Media Monitors could continue to employ them after the three months expired. The workers had no idea what was happening until one morning, at the end of July when the contract expired, managers came around and said ‘we don’t need any of you’.

The workers were told to pack their bags and go home.

They are now seeking the four weeks notice from Chong Newztel through the Employment Authority.

Darien lays out how the Redundancy Protection Bill would have helped Tanya:

1. The four weeks notice would be enforceable.
2. Tanya would have been entitled to compensation of 4 weeks pay the first year and another 4 weeks pay for the additional two years she worked for the company.
3. Chong Newztel would have had to pay.

Sounds fair to me, and I’d imagine to most New Zealanders too. Time for the Government to get off the fence and back the bill.

23 comments on “Why the Redundancy Protection Bill matters ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. snoozer 1
    17 September 2009 at 11:33 am

    It’s not right that people who have worked hard and find their job disappears, through no fault of their own, should be left with nothing to tide them and their families through.

  2. ben 2
    17 September 2009 at 11:39 am

    I don’t understand. Sounds like a breach of contract to me, with remedy available through courts or the raft of employee protection already in place in this country. Why the need for additional legislation?

    This is legislation that adds costs for employers. Now it’s all very well to argue they can afford it, but there is no free lunch, and they will respond quite predictably to increases in the cost of letting an emploee go by not hiring some workers in the first place. That’s the context that is essential for weighing up the value of this legislation. Oddly, that’s missing from your otherwise excellent anecdote.

    • Eddie 2.1
      17 September 2009 at 11:46 am

      Some points in response:

      1) Redundancy protection is not provided for in legisation and most Kiwis don’t have anything in their employment contract. That’s why the bill is needed.

      2) 80% of union collective agreements already have redundancy protections and it works fine for them.

      3) The Australian government has just brought in the same protections as recommended in Darien’s bill. It’s working fine over there, as it is in nearly every other developed country. In fact Australia’s unemployment rate is now lower than NZ’s.

      4) There’s no evidence redundancy protections lead to higher unemployment. In fact as No Right Turn has pointed out there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary.

      5) Even if we accept your argument it’s no reason for the Government to vote against it in its first reading. Arguing over the details is what the select committee process is for.

      • ben 2.1.1
        17 September 2009 at 1:59 pm

        Eddie

        1) Redundancy protection is not provided for in legisation and most Kiwis don’t have anything in their employment contract. That’s why the bill is needed.

        I’m pretty sure just because something isn’t in legislation doesn’t make that a reason to have it!

        2) 80% of union collective agreements already have redundancy protections and it works fine for them.

        Fine compared to what? All the people outside the union who can’t get a job? Same for 3. What’s your argument here – labour demand curves don’t slope down? That tax incidence doesn’t fall on the employee? Good luck with that argument, if that’s what you’re saying. Marty G has correctly pointed out those aren’t true. If you’re not going to disagree with marty, then explain the benefit of forcing all employers to offer a benefit to workers that will reduce demand for their labour and be paid for by workers themselves.

        4) There’s no evidence redundancy protections lead to higher unemployment. In fact as No Right Turn has pointed out there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary.

        There’s all the evidence in the world that labour demand is decreasing in price. I haven’t looked at research on redundancy specifically, but its just another tax on labour and, as with all taxes, people and businesses buy less of what is being taxed.

        Or is that Standard’s position that labour demand is increasing in price? Good luck with that.

        5) Even if we accept your argument it’s no reason for the Government to vote against it in its first reading. Arguing over the details is what the select committee process is for.

        Well maybe. I was just pointing out that Tanya probably won’t benefit from this bill. If she doesn’t lose her job, she’ll necessarily have to pay for her redunancy with lower wages than she would have othrwise earned. That’s a perfectly standard result in economics, as Marty G correctly notes.

        • Eddie 2.1.1.1
          17 September 2009 at 2:32 pm

          I think what you’re arguing makes sense if you’re relying entirely on first year university economic models. When you look at reality though most of your assumptions simply don’t bear out.

          Every time an improvement to wages and working conditions is raised the right screams “it’ll just lead to more unemployment!” – never happens.

          Perhaps you should start dealing in reality rather than abstract theory. Almost every other developed country has redundancy protections and it hasn’t ruined their economies.

          • ben 2.1.1.1.1
            17 September 2009 at 3:03 pm

            Every time an improvement to wages and working conditions is raised the right screams “it’ll just lead to more unemployment!’ never happens.

            Actually Eddie it does happen. Minimum wage effects on unemployment is possibly the most studied empirical relationship in all of economics, and the evidence is 95% (perhaps 99%?) in favour of negative employment effects from minimum wage. It is only the fact that relatively few are caught by minimum wage that prevents it being more obvious.

            Perhaps you should start dealing in reality rather than abstract theory.

            I can point to research supporting the idea that taxing labour creates unemployment and that employees bear the cost of legislated benefits. That research is based on looking at the real world. What else did you expect?

            The only reason you can accuse me of not looking at the real world is because the model behind your comments is left implicit. But its still a model and as far as I can tell isn’t informed by anything more than your own abstract ideas. So how about YOU drop the abstract theory, for a change?

            Almost every other developed country has redundancy protections and it hasn’t ruined their economies.

            Nobody is saying the economy will be ruined by this, but thanks for the hyperbole. Actually what is being said is that it will predictably hurt the people it is trying to help – not the first time a government program has suffered that problem.

    • lprent 2.2
      17 September 2009 at 12:53 pm

      Of course you forget to look at the costs to the employees…. What a surprise

      • ben 2.2.1
        17 September 2009 at 1:47 pm

        Good point. Because the cost of hiring is increased by mandatory redundancy, some will be left unemployed, some will be let go ahead of the legislation taking effect, and those lucky enough to keep their jobs will pay through lower wages on average (perhaps not in direct reductions but in the form of delayed or reduced increases).

        This is a standard result in economics, which is that tax incidence is shared between employer and employee. Forcing employers to pay redundancy is a new labour tax, which will be borne in part or whole by employees.

        Marty G had a post on tax incidence only a month ago that was right in its thrust if wrong in the details, as P Walker pointed out.

        So what’s the point, folks? Higher unemployment, lost jobs, and those left bear some or all the cost of it anyway. Who doesn’t lose from this idea?

  3. vidiot 3
    17 September 2009 at 12:25 pm

    When Kiwi saver was 1st implement, we opted out of it and instead went for a company policy of providing income protection insurance for all of the staff members. The cost to the company was minimal (less that the 2% that KiwiSaver was going to cost) and we all have that security in place now, should things go wrong.

  4. Monty 4
    17 September 2009 at 12:57 pm

    Sometimes I wonder why the socialists are just so dim. Can you not consider the consequences of such a proposal. As someone who was made redundant (and without any prior warning on 3 September 2009 it would have been nice to have had a redundancy payment. But the flip side is employment in the first place – such provisions upon employers would mean the employers would simply not hire staff in the first place.

    Tanya would likely be out of work for a very long time simply because on tp of all the other leave and employment provisions (4 weeks annual leave, sick leave, PGs) employers will do anything not to have to employ people. In a micro-economic environment looking at individual cases, this may seem a god thing – but at a marco-economic level it is pure stupidity – just what we have come to expect from the socialists.

    • Tigger 4.1
      17 September 2009 at 1:53 pm

      Using that argument why are we bothering with any employment conditions at all? Let’s all just work 7 days at 1c an hour while our children are sent to the mines to toil for bread and water.

      Employers need workers – it’s simple negotiation as to what the terms will be. Darien’s trying to improve the terms for the workers. And good on her.

      • ben 4.1.1
        17 September 2009 at 4:33 pm

        Tigger actually it is not legislation that protects us from 1c wages. Something like 98% of the labour force is paid more than the government says is the minimum. So what else could it be?

        Competition between firms is the driver of those wages. Recognising this is important, because legislation that damages that competition is legislation that damages compensation.

        As you say, employers need workers, and they must offer enough to convince workers to apply to them and not the hundreds or thousands of other firms competing for them.

        Cool system, eh.

        • Noko 4.1.1.1
          17 September 2009 at 7:45 pm

          98%, eh? Where’d you pull that one from?

          According to the CIA World Fact Book, the working population of New Zealand is:
          >15-64 years: 66.5% (male 1,404,143/female 1,399,530)

          According to a Wikinews article published in 2006 when minimum wage was raised to $11.25 an hour, 119,200 people were affected by this wage raise.

          2803673*0.95 (Working age population, calculating those unemployed March 2009)
          2663489.35/119200 = 22.34 (2 dp) (Working population, divided by those on minimum wage)
          1/22.34*100 = 4.48% (2 dp)

          So, it affects 4.48% of the population, not just 2% as you claim. But even that makes it sound much smaller than it is. I know you like to put faceless numbers on it, but that 119200 human beings it helps when the minimum wage is raised. It’s probably even more than that, but a quick Google didn’t reveal to me the number of people on the sickness benefit, and I didn’t find any articles that gave me more recent figures on numbers of people on minimum wage.

          What you also conveniently ignore, as most free-market economists to-oft seem to is that yes, competition can drive prices lower, and wages higher but there’s nothing preventing collusion between the companies to offer the same lower wage and screw over the people that need to survive.

          • ben 4.1.1.1.1
            18 September 2009 at 12:06 am

            Noko, thanks so much. You’re right, the new number changes everything. I will rephrase:

            Something like 96% of the labour force is paid more than the government says is the minimum. So what else could it be?

            Competition between firms is the driver of those wages. Recognising this is important, because legislation that damages that competition is legislation that damages compensation.

            As you say, employers need workers, and they must offer enough to convince workers to apply to them and not the hundreds or thousands of other firms competing for them.

            Cool system, eh.

          • ben 4.1.1.1.2
            18 September 2009 at 12:23 am

            So, it affects 4.48% of the population, not just 2% as you claim. But even that makes it sound much smaller than it is. I know you like to put faceless numbers on it, but that 119200 human beings it helps when the minimum wage is raised. It’s probably even more than that, but a quick Google didn’t reveal to me the number of people on the sickness benefit, and I didn’t find any articles that gave me more recent figures on numbers of people on minimum wage.

            What you also conveniently ignore, as most free-market economists to-oft seem to is that yes, competition can drive prices lower, and wages higher but there’s nothing preventing collusion between the companies to offer the same lower wage and screw over the people that need to survive.

            Sorry I forgot about the next bit.

            Noko, in case you hadn’t noticed the reason I’m here is because I think minimum wage is a bad deal for the people affected by it. It is simply childish to believe people who have studied minimum wage oppose it because they don’t care about other people. I cannot recall meeting a single person who opposed minimum wage because they don’t care about people affected by it. In fact I doubt those people exist other than in your imagination.

            There is a body of research available written by people who have looked very hard at all the effects of minimum wage. Much of it written, I imagine, by people who care at least as much about poverty as you do. The research is very strongly (though not entirely) negative in its conclusions. You could try looking at this research. Economics offers many ideas on alleviating poverty, but minimum wage is off the bottom of that list and in another category called ‘exacerbates the problem’.

            Finally: collusion. you’re absolutely right. Another form of market behaviour having a similar effect to collusion is monopsony: a monopoly buyer of labour who uses its size to depress wages. It is a major problem in New Zealand. What are two industries badly underpaid in New Zealand relative to overseas and with a monopoly buyer problem? Education and health.

            As I said, competition matters for compensation.

    • Maynard J 4.2
      17 September 2009 at 2:16 pm

      I was mocking you yesterday for only looking at the short sighted view, and you are back at it. Should we all get paid less, so we all have jobs? That is what you are ultimately advocating, you socialist.

      Your argument is worthless – we should never agitate for better employment conditions because unemployment will increase. There is no evidence that is the case.

      • ben 4.2.1
        17 September 2009 at 4:43 pm

        Ironically, Maynard, this legislation will achieve the double of destroying jobs and ensuring those who are lucky enough to keep them will get less take home pay than they otherwise would. This will become apparent in the long term, which is what I take it you care about most.

        Employment conditions can be improved through things other than legislation. The most obvious opportunity is to reduce the friction in moving between jobs, which is substantial thanks to the raft of costs put onto employers. Adding staff exit costs to employers diminishes protection for employees, who will find it more difficult to get other work when stuck with a bad employer. In fact legislation like the forced redundancy will probably interfere with other benefits firms offer. A reasonably standard finding in minimum wage research is that among those lucky enough not to lose their jobs when minimum wages are hiked, the employer compensates in other ways, such as more policing of meal breaks and less generous other benefits. Apart from lost wages and higher unemployment, forced redundancy will probably have these indirect effects too. Simply because these effects are hard to see doesn’t make them less real for those affected.

        There’s no free lunch here, folks: what the government gives will be reliably lost elsewhere, and mostly at the expense of employees.

        • snoozer 4.2.1.1
          17 September 2009 at 5:05 pm

          I refer you to the hard times website and eddie’s earlier comment:

          Eddie
          September 17, 2009 at 11:46 am
          Some points in response:

          1) Redundancy protection is not provided for in legisation and most Kiwis don’t have anything in their employment contract. That’s why the bill is needed.

          2) 80% of union collective agreements already have redundancy protections and it works fine for them.

          3) The Australian government has just brought in the same protections as recommended in Darien’s bill. It’s working fine over there, as it is in nearly every other developed country. In fact Australia’s unemployment rate is now lower than NZ’s.

          4) There’s no evidence redundancy protections lead to higher unemployment. In fact as No Right Turn has pointed out there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary.

          5) Even if we accept your argument it’s no reason for the Government to vote against it in its first reading. Arguing over the details is what the select committee process is for.

          • ben 4.2.1.1.1
            17 September 2009 at 5:15 pm

            Thanks for the reference, and a re-post of the text no less.

            You’ll notice I answered Eddie already. I especially liked Eddie’s theory that labour demand is increasing in wages. Oh and his idea that as long as the economy isn’t wrecked it must be good legislation.

            PhD for that man.

  5. jcuknz 5
    17 September 2009 at 4:03 pm

    The long term solution is that we should have fewer babies, one per couple as in China. Fewer people would mean production would be aimed at the neccessary as opposed to the frivolous created to swell GDP to no great purpose
    I can remember when I married on $30 nett a fortnight. I was made redundant in 1989 and thanks to my union got a good payout, I feel for those today without anything and I guess stand down periods for the dole. Whatever the ecconomics it is completely wrong in human terms for people to be dumped without any consideration.

  6. Maynard J 6
    17 September 2009 at 11:10 pm

    Ben, I had a read of your various comments, and if I may attempt to sum up the core idea, it is that the employment market is a better way for employees to gain what they desire than through regulation and such.

    Needless to say, I am not a huge fan of the vagaries of the market alone, market failure and the necessity for people to be priced out for an equilibrium to be struck and so on.

    The following is taking your comments further than you have, but you appear to be arguing that employment conditions would be better if there was no regulation at all, no legislated minimums or maximums or conditions or rights or concessions. I am not sure if that is what you believe, but if so, the obvious point is that yes, it would be better for some, but since demand is limited, it would clarly favour the ‘buyers’, and there would be a lot more people who would be worse off at the expense of a few.

    Perhaps that is not your point, and you are happy with a certain level of legislation and regulation – if that is the case, I would be interested to hear where exactly you draw the line.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Ceasefire agreement needed now: Peters
    New Zealand is urging both Israel and Hamas to agree to an immediate ceasefire to avoid the further humanitarian catastrophe that military action in Rafah would unleash, Foreign Minister Winston Peters says.   “The immense suffering in Gaza cannot be allowed to worsen further. Both sides have a responsibility to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 hours ago

  • Daily school attendance data now available
    A new online data dashboard released today as part of the Government’s school attendance action plan makes more timely daily attendance data available to the public and parents, says Associate Education Minister David Seymour.  The interactive dashboard will be updated once a week to show a national average of how ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 hours ago

  • Ambassador to United States appointed
    Foreign Minister Winston Peters has announced Rosemary Banks will be New Zealand’s next Ambassador to the United States of America.    “Our relationship with the United States is crucial for New Zealand in strategic, security and economic terms,” Mr Peters says.    “New Zealand and the United States have a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 hours ago

  • New permit proposed for recreational gold mining
    The Government is considering creating a new tier of minerals permitting that will make it easier for hobby miners to prospect for gold. “New Zealand was built on gold, it’s in our DNA. Our gold deposits, particularly in regions such as Otago and the West Coast have always attracted fortune-hunters. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    8 hours ago

  • NZ and the UAE launch FTA negotiations
    Minister for Trade Todd McClay today announced that New Zealand and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) will commence negotiations on a free trade agreement (FTA). Minister McClay met with his counterpart UAE Trade Minister Dr Thani bin Ahmed Al Zeyoudi in Dubai, where they announced the launch of negotiations on a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    12 hours ago

  • New Zealand Sign Language Week an opportunity for anyone to sign
    New Zealand Sign Language Week is an excellent opportunity for all Kiwis to give the language a go, Disabilities Issues Minister Louise Upston says. This week (May 6 to 12) is New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL) Week. The theme is “an Aotearoa where anyone can sign anywhere” and aims to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    23 hours ago

  • Next stop NASA for New Zealand students
    Six tertiary students have been selected to work on NASA projects in the US through a New Zealand Space Scholarship, Space Minister Judith Collins announced today. “This is a fantastic opportunity for these talented students. They will undertake internships at NASA’s Ames Research Center or its Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), where ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    23 hours ago

  • $1.9 billion investment to keep NZ safe from crime
    New Zealanders will be safer because of a $1.9 billion investment in more frontline Corrections officers, more support for offenders to turn away from crime, and more prison capacity, Corrections Minister Mark Mitchell says. “Our Government said we would crack down on crime. We promised to restore law and order, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    23 hours ago

  • OECD reinforces need to control spending
    The OECD’s latest report on New Zealand reinforces the importance of bringing Government spending under control, Finance Minister Nicola Willis says. The OECD conducts country surveys every two years to review its members’ economic policies. The 2024 New Zealand survey was presented in Wellington today by OECD Chief Economist Clare Lombardelli.   ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago

  • Agreement delivers Local Water Done Well for Auckland
    The Government has delivered on its election promise to provide a financially sustainable model for Auckland under its Local Water Done Well plan. The plan, which has been unanimously endorsed by Auckland Council’s Governing Body, will see Aucklanders avoid the previously projected 25.8 per cent water rates increases while retaining ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago

  • Gaza and the Pacific on the agenda with Germany
    Foreign Minister Winston Peters discussed the need for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, and enhanced cooperation in the Pacific with German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock during her first official visit to New Zealand today.    "New Zealand and Germany enjoy shared interests and values, including the rule of law, democracy, respect for the international system ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago

  • Decision allows for housing growth in Western Bay of Plenty
    The Minister Responsible for RMA Reform, Chris Bishop today released his decision on four recommendations referred to him by the Western Bay of Plenty District Council, opening the door to housing growth in the area. The Council’s Plan Change 92 allows more homes to be built in existing and new ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago

  • Speech to New Zealand China Council
    Thank you, John McKinnon and the New Zealand China Council for the invitation to speak to you today.    Thank you too, all members of the China Council. Your effort has played an essential role in helping to build, shape, and grow a balanced and resilient relationship between our two ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago

  • Modern insurance law will protect Kiwi households
    The Government is modernising insurance law to better protect Kiwis and provide security in the event of a disaster, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly announced today. “These reforms are long overdue. New Zealand’s insurance law is complicated and dated, some of which is more than 100 years old. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago

  • Government recommits to equal pay
    The coalition Government is refreshing its approach to supporting pay equity claims as time-limited funding for the Pay Equity Taskforce comes to an end, Public Service Minister Nicola Willis says.  “Three years ago, the then-government introduced changes to the Equal Pay Act to support pay equity bargaining. The changes were ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago

  • Transforming how our children learn to read
    Structured literacy will change the way New Zealand children learn to read - improving achievement and setting students up for success, Education Minister Erica Stanford says.  “Being able to read and write is a fundamental life skill that too many young people are missing out on. Recent data shows that ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago

  • NZ not backing down in Canada dairy dispute
    Trade Minister Todd McClay says Canada’s refusal to comply in full with a CPTPP trade dispute ruling in our favour over dairy trade is cynical and New Zealand has no intention of backing down. Mr McClay said he has asked for urgent legal advice in respect of our ‘next move’ ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago

  • Stronger oversight for our most vulnerable children
    The rights of our children and young people will be enhanced by changes the coalition Government will make to strengthen oversight of the Oranga Tamariki system, including restoring a single Children’s Commissioner. “The Government is committed to delivering better public services that care for our most at-risk young people and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago

  • Streamlining Building Consent Changes
    The Government is making it easier for minor changes to be made to a building consent so building a home is easier and more affordable, Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk says.      “The coalition Government is focused on making it easier and cheaper to build homes so we can ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago

  • Minister acknowledges passing of Sir Robert Martin (KNZM)
    New Zealand lost a true legend when internationally renowned disability advocate Sir Robert Martin (KNZM) passed away at his home in Whanganui last night, Disabilities Issues Minister Louise Upston says. “Our Government’s thoughts are with his wife Lynda, family and community, those he has worked with, the disability community in ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago

  • Speech to New Zealand Institute of International Affairs, Parliament – Annual Lecture: Challenges ...
    Good evening –   Before discussing the challenges and opportunities facing New Zealand’s foreign policy, we’d like to first acknowledge the New Zealand Institute of International Affairs. You have contributed to debates about New Zealand foreign policy over a long period of time, and we thank you for hosting us.  ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago

  • Accelerating airport security lines
    From today, passengers travelling internationally from Auckland Airport will be able to keep laptops and liquids in their carry-on bags for security screening thanks to new technology, Transport Minister Simeon Brown says. “Creating a more efficient and seamless travel experience is important for holidaymakers and businesses, enabling faster movement through ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago

  • Community hui to talk about kina barrens
    People with an interest in the health of Northland’s marine ecosystems are invited to a public meeting to discuss how to deal with kina barrens, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. Mr Jones will lead the discussion, which will take place on Friday, 10 May, at Awanui Hotel in ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago

  • Kiwi exporters win as NZ-EU FTA enters into force
    Kiwi exporters are $100 million better off today with the NZ EU FTA entering into force says Trade Minister Todd McClay. “This is all part of our plan to grow the economy. New Zealand's prosperity depends on international trade, making up 60 per cent of the country’s total economic activity. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago

  • Mining resurgence a welcome sign
    There are heartening signs that the extractive sector is once again becoming an attractive prospect for investors and a source of economic prosperity for New Zealand, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. “The beginnings of a resurgence in extractive industries are apparent in media reports of the sector in the past ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago

  • Ō-Rākau Remembrance Bill passes first reading
    The return of the historic Ō-Rākau battle site to the descendants of those who fought there moved one step closer today with the first reading of Te Pire mō Ō-Rākau, Te Pae o Maumahara / The Ō-Rākau Remembrance Bill. The Bill will entrust the 9.7-hectare battle site, five kilometres west ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago

  • Government to boost public EV charging network
    Energy Minister Simeon Brown has announced 25 new high-speed EV charging hubs along key routes between major urban centres and outlined the Government’s plan to supercharge New Zealand’s EV infrastructure.  The hubs will each have several chargers and be capable of charging at least four – and up to 10 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago

  • Residential Property Managers Bill to not progress
    The coalition Government will not proceed with the previous Government’s plans to regulate residential property managers, Housing Minister Chris Bishop says. “I have written to the Chairperson of the Social Services and Community Committee to inform him that the Government does not intend to support the Residential Property Managers Bill ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Independent review into disability support services
    The Government has announced an independent review into the disability support system funded by the Ministry of Disabled People – Whaikaha. Disability Issues Minister Louise Upston says the review will look at what can be done to strengthen the long-term sustainability of Disability Support Services to provide disabled people and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Justice Minister updates UN on law & order plan
    Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has attended the Universal Periodic Review in Geneva and outlined the Government’s plan to restore law and order. “Speaking to the United Nations Human Rights Council provided us with an opportunity to present New Zealand’s human rights progress, priorities, and challenges, while responding to issues and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Ending emergency housing motels in Rotorua
    The Government and Rotorua Lakes Council are committed to working closely together to end the use of contracted emergency housing motels in Rotorua. Associate Minister of Housing (Social Housing) Tama Potaka says the Government remains committed to ending the long-term use of contracted emergency housing motels in Rotorua by the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Trade Minister travels to Riyadh, OECD, and Dubai
    Trade Minister Todd McClay heads overseas today for high-level trade talks in the Gulf region, and a key OECD meeting in Paris. Mr McClay will travel to Riyadh to meet with counterparts from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). “New Zealand’s goods and services exports to the Gulf region ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Education priorities focused on lifting achievement
    Education Minister Erica Stanford has outlined six education priorities to deliver a world-leading education system that sets Kiwi kids up for future success. “I’m putting ambition, achievement and outcomes at the heart of our education system. I want every child to be inspired and engaged in their learning so they ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • NZTA App first step towards digital driver licence
    The new NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) App is a secure ‘one stop shop’ to provide the services drivers need, Transport Minister Simeon Brown and Digitising Government Minister Judith Collins say.  “The NZTA App will enable an easier way for Kiwis to pay for Vehicle Registration and Road User Charges (RUC). ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Supporting whānau out of emergency housing
    Whānau with tamariki growing up in emergency housing motels will be prioritised for social housing starting this week, says Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka. “Giving these whānau a better opportunity to build healthy stable lives for themselves and future generations is an essential part of the Government’s goal of reducing ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Tribute to Dave O'Sullivan
    Racing Minister Winston Peters has paid tribute to an icon of the industry with the recent passing of Dave O’Sullivan (OBE). “Our sympathies are with the O’Sullivan family with the sad news of Dave O’Sullivan’s recent passing,” Mr Peters says. “His contribution to racing, initially as a jockey and then ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Speech – Eid al-Fitr
    Assalaamu alaikum, greetings to you all. Eid Mubarak, everyone! I want to extend my warmest wishes to you and everyone celebrating this joyous occasion. It is a pleasure to be here. I have enjoyed Eid celebrations at Parliament before, but this is my first time joining you as the Minister ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Government saves access to medicines
    Associate Health Minister David Seymour has announced Pharmac’s largest ever budget of $6.294 billion over four years, fixing a $1.774 billion fiscal cliff.    “Access to medicines is a crucial part of many Kiwis’ lives. We’ve committed to a budget allocation of $1.774 billion over four years so Kiwis are ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Pharmac Chair appointed
    Hon Paula Bennett has been appointed as member and chair of the Pharmac board, Associate Health Minister David Seymour announced today. "Pharmac is a critical part of New Zealand's health system and plays a significant role in ensuring that Kiwis have the best possible access to medicines,” says Mr Seymour. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

  • Taking action on Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder
    Hundreds of New Zealand families affected by Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) will benefit from a new Government focus on prevention and treatment, says Health Minister Dr Shane Reti. “We know FASD is a leading cause of preventable intellectual and neurodevelopmental disability in New Zealand,” Dr Reti says.  “Every day, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago

Page generated in The Standard by Wordpress at 2024-05-07T04:41:18+00:00