AM Edition: Top 10 Politics Articles on LiveNews.co.nz for April 22, 2026 – Full Text

April 22, 2026

AM Edition: Here are the top 10 politics articles on LiveNews.co.nz for April 22, 2026 – Full Text

The House: Parliament’s week of review

April 21, 2026

Parliament House and the Beehive wreathed in heavy mist during winter 2019 © VNP / Phil Smith

MPs are back in rainy Wellington for a two-week sitting block after a fortnight in their electorates during the Easter school holidays.

This week’s parliamentary business centres on the Annual Review Debate, with the addition of Treaty settlement bills, and bills returning from select committee, with an extra sitting on Thursday morning (9am rather than 2pm) in order to fit everything in.

Arguing about past spending

A part of Parliament’s odyssey of financial scrutiny, the Annual Review Debate takes place every year as one of the final stages in the retrospective review of government performance against budget allocations made over a year ago.

MPs have ten hours of debate in which to interrogate government ministers sector by sector, following earlier scrutiny at select committee hearings, another cog in the financial scrutiny cycle.

Parliament’s financial scrutiny cycle, which this year for the first time includes two scrutiny weeks. Parliament

All of Tuesday and Wednesday’s sitting hours (other than Question Time and Wednesday’s General Debate) are dedicated to the Annual Review debate.

The debate acts as the committee stage of the Appropriation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill, so the process largely mirrors a standard committee stage format.

Across Tuesday’s sitting, MPs will scrutinise relevant ministers in the heavyweight sectors of finance, transport, and housing, followed by health, education, and workplace relations and safety after the dinner break.

On Wednesday, the House begins with a general debate, when MPs can take a lash at issues not tied to any particular piece of parliamentary business or legislation.

After an hour, the House returns to the Annual Review debate, covering energy, social development and employment, the environment (each roughly an hour), then climate change, Pacific peoples, and Māori development (about half an hour each).

Treaty Settlement Bills

Aside from the Annual Review, the other notable business this week includes two claims settlement bills concerning Ngāti Rāhiri Tumutumu (second reading and committee stage) and Ngāti Tara Tokanui (committee stage).

Treaty Claim settlement bills take years to come to fruition beginning with lengthy negotiations between iwi and the Crown. The legislation forms the statutory leg of settlements addressing historical breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi by the Crown.

These bills include accounts of the Crown’s actions and resulting grievances, along with an official apology and details of redress. When debating Treaty bills, MPs typically put aside the usual political approach to debating, and acknowledge these histories and speak to the specifics of financial and cultural redress as set out in the legislation.

MPs debate many bills to relatively sparse public gallery, but the importance of claims settlement bills means iwi, hapū, and whānau travel to Wellington to witness the passage of their bill in person – especially the final third reading. To mark the moment, the Speaker grants permission for waiata when the bill passes.

The Ngāti Rāhiri Tumutumu Claims Settlement Bill will receive its second reading on Thursday morning and its committee stage later in the day. The Ngāti Tara Tokanui Claims Settlement Bill will then move to its committee stage.

Other odds and ends bills

Thursday will also see a range of stages across a hodgepodge of bills, most returning to the House from select committee.

The Building and Construction Sector (Self-certification by Plumbers and Drainlayers) Amendment Bill returns from the Transport and Infrastructure Committee this week. It aims to remove some of the bureaucratic hurdles involved in plumbing and drainlaying work.

The Regulatory Systems (Transport) Amendment Bill is a technical piece of legislation that updates regulatory systems across the transport, maritime, and aviation sectors. Given its nature, it is relatively uncontroversial and should move smoothly through the House.

The Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (Supervisor, Levy, and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, aside from being a mouthful, is in the name of ACT’s Nicole McKee. It strengthens some of the regulatory systems used by government agencies enforcing anti-money laundering and financial crime laws. All three opposition parties supported this Bill at first reading, but both Labour and the Greens signalled that their continued support was not guaranteed, so the second reading will reveal whether this remains the case.

The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill is one of the government’s legislative attempts to curb rising council rates. To do so, it lays out purposes for local government and prioritises the provision of core services (water, rubbish collection etc). This bill is likely to be contentious as it would restricts what a council can and should do to quite specific and practical functions.

Finally, the Online Casino Gambling Amendment Bill receives its third reading this week and will likely become law by next Monday. It introduces a licensing regime for gambling platforms wanting to operate in New Zealand.

*RNZ’s The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament’s Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ.

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

Back to index · Read original article

Indian community welcomes ‘momentous’ free trade deal

April 21, 2026

Source: Radio New Zealand

Christopher Luxon visits Swaminarayan Akshardham temple in New Delhi, India, in March 2025. RNZ / Marika Khabazi

New Zealand’s Indian community has welcomed the government’s decision to sign a long-awaited free trade agreement with India next week in New Delhi, describing it as a major milestone in bilateral trade ties.

Trade Minister Todd McClay has confirmed that legal verification of the agreement has been completed, with both governments set to formally sign the deal on 27 April.

Negotiations concluded in December last year.

The government says the agreement will eliminate or reduce tariffs on 95 percent of New Zealand exports to India, one of the highest levels secured in any Indian trade deal.

The signing will now trigger a parliamentary process, with the full text and a national interest analysis to be submitted and reviewed by a select committee, alongside public submissions.

Business and community leaders say the deal has been a long time coming, potentially unlocking significant economic opportunities.

That said, some are urging caution around implementation and migration safeguards.

Veer Khar is president of New Zealand Indian Central Association. Supplied / New Zealand Indian Central Association

Veer Khar, president of the New Zealand Indian Central Association, said he remained confident the deal would ultimately gain cross-party backing.

“It’s an election year, so we understand political parties will make the most of the opportunity to take shots at each other and that’s fair and part of the process,” he said.

“But ultimately, we’re confident the deal will be signed because it offers so much benefit.”

Sudesh Jhunjhnuwala, CEO of Sudima Hotels and Hind Management Blessen Tom

Sudesh Jhunjhnuwala, chief executive of Sudima Hotels and Hind Management, described the agreement as a “once in a lifetime deal”.

Having been part of the prime minister’s delegation last year, he said India’s renewed interest in an FTA with New Zealand came as a surprise.

He added that establishing direct flight connections would be a natural next step.

“Whenever there’s a direct flight, tourism from India takes off, and at the same time it will send more tourists to India as well,” he said.

Jhunjhnuwala said stronger economic conditions driven by the FTA would also support domestic tourism.

“The exciting part about the FTA is that it brings economic benefits to New Zealand, he said.

“And when the economy is doing well, people spend more locally. Over 50 percent of our business comes from domestic tourism.”

Dame Ranjna Patel is the first person of Indian origin to be inducted into the New Zealand Business Hall of Fame. RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly

Dame Ranjna Patel said the level of public debate around the agreement was disproportionate.

“When New Zealand signed the China free trade deal there wasn’t this much kerfuffle,” she said.

“We’re a very small cog in the system, and I don’t know what fearmongering is about the FTA. It’s such a good thing to happen.”

She said the political noise could be related to the upcoming election.

“We probably won’t get a second chance if we turn it down right now,” she said.

Sunil Kaushal is CEO of Indian New Zealand Business Council. Supplied

Sunil Kaushal, chief executive of the India New Zealand Business Council, called the signing “a momentous occasion” that had been decades in the making.

“It’s been a long time coming,” he said. “As the good old Mainland Cheese ad would say, ‘good things take time’.”

Kaushal said he believed Parliament would ultimately support the agreement.

“I think Labour will make the best decision for the country rather than the party because this deal will add more jobs and more money into the economy,” he said.

Arunima Dhingra, chief executive of immigration and education agency Aims Global, welcomed the signing but said attention must now turn to outcomes.

“For years we’ve talked about the potential, and now we’re keen to see what it actually delivers,” Dhingra said.

She said the agreement could strengthen collaboration in education, skilled talent and investment.

“There are parts of India that are world-leading at the moment,” she said.

“Better partnership and alignment could allow New Zealand to test ideas on a much larger global stage.”

Dhingra emphasised the need to focus on skilled migration.

Kush Bhargava, chief executive of the Aotearoa Bharat Economic Foundation, said the deal would boost New Zealand businesses by improving direct links with India and reducing tariffs, calling it a potential “game changer”.

Manu Lambai, manager of Indian jewellery giant Malabar Gold and Diamonds’ Auckland showroom, said the deal would also expand access to specialised products in New Zealand.

“Those who make these kinds of specialised, handcrafted jewellery are in India, and with the FTA we can bring them directly to New Zealand,” Lambai said.

The company entered the New Zealand market following the country’s comprehensive economic partnership agreement with the United Arab Emirates.

Mahesh Muralidhar is a startup entrepreneur and a National candidate for Tāmaki electorate in the 2026 general election. RNZ / Blessen Tom

Mahesh Muralidhar, chief executive of Phase One Ventures and National Party candidate for Tāmaki, said the agreement would open up new opportunities.

“India is one of the fastest-growing economies in the world and will maintain that growth for many years,” he said.

“There is a highly engaged middle class that is growing rapidly and will demand more services, products and food.”

He said New Zealand was well placed to meet that demand through innovation and expertise, and that the deal would also hold significance for the Indian diaspora.

Maungakiekie MP Priyanca Radhakrishnan. RNZ / Angus Dreaver

Labour MP for Maungakiekie Priyanca Radhakrishnan said any agreement must serve New Zealand’s long-term interests, raising concerns that still needed addressing.

“Labour has raised a number of concerns about the free trade agreement that still need to be clarified by the government,” she said.

“This includes wanting stronger safeguards against the exploitation of Indian migrants who come here for study, like we saw not long ago.”

She said Labour would review the full details before deciding whether to support the legislation.

“Signing a free trade agreement if you don’t have the majority support in Parliament – and, at this point, they don’t – is irresponsible and could damage our international reputation,” she said.

Mahesh Bindra, former New Zealand First MP and chair of the New Zealand Bharat Chamber of Commerce and Industry RNZ / Jane Patterson

Mahesh Bindra, former New Zealand First MP and chair of the New Zealand Bharat Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said the agreement would be “tremendously beneficial” but acknowledged debate was inevitable.

He said he understood concerns raised by Foreign Minister Winston Peters around immigration settings.

“His view that immigration should not be treated as an opportunity to bring in people we don’t need has some merit,” Bindra said.

“New Zealand needs migrants, but we need skilled migrants that the country requires, not mass migration or people using New Zealand as a stepping stone to other countries.”

ACT MP Parmjeet Parmar said a free trade deal with India is an exciting prospect for both New Zealand and the Indian community.

“Such opportunities go beyond individual benefit,” she said.

“Increased trade enables businesses to grow, lowers costs and opens new markets for Kiwi exporters, supporting jobs, lifting incomes and creating opportunities across the country.”

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

Back to index · Read original article

Amnesty International: State of the World’s Human Rights – Annual Report

April 21, 2026

Source: AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

21 April 2026 – Amnesty International calls on states to stop predatory, anti-rights order from taking hold in pivotal moment for humanity

Predatory attacks on multilateralism, international law and civil society marked 2025
The alternative on offer is a racist, patriarchal, unequal and anti-rights world order
Protesters, activists and global bodies are working to resist, disrupt and transform

The world is on the brink of a perilous new era, driven by powerful states’, corporations’ and anti-rights movements’ assaults on multilateralism, international law and human rights, Amnesty International warned today upon launching its annual report, The State of the World’s Human Rights. States, international bodies and civil society must reject the politics of appeasement and collectively resist these attacks to prevent this new order from taking hold, the organization said in its assessment of the human rights situation in 144 countries.

“We are confronting the most challenging moment of our age. Humanity is under attack from transnational anti-rights movements and predatory governments determined to assert their dominance through unlawful wars and brazen economic blackmail,” said Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard.

“For years, Amnesty International has denounced the gradual disintegration of human rights in every part of the world, warning of the consequences of flagrant rule-breaking by governments and corporate actors. We’ve also demonstrated time and again how double standards and selective compliance with international law have weakened the multilateral system and accountability.

“What marks this moment as fundamentally different is that we’re no longer documenting erosion around the system’s edges. This is a direct assault on the foundations of human rights and the international rules-based order by the most powerful actors for the purpose of control, impunity and profit.

“The spiralling conflict in the Middle East is a product of this descent into lawlessness. Following the initial unlawful US-Israeli attacks in violation of the UN Charter, which triggered Iran’s indiscriminate retaliation, the conflict has quickly morphed into an open warfare against civilians and civilian infrastructure, exacerbating the already catastrophic suffering of people across the region. It is now engulfing countries around the world, impacting populations everywhere, and threatening the livelihood of millions. This is what happens when the norms, institutions and legal framework painstakingly built to safeguard humanity are hollowed out for the purpose of domination.”

“Amnesty’s 2025 annual report moves beyond warning of imminent breakdown to documenting a collapse now underway, and exposing its devastating consequences for human rights, global stability and the lives of millions in 2026 and beyond. It calls on states around the world to urgently reject the politics of appeasement embraced in 2025, overcome fear, and resist in words and actions the construction of a predatory world order.”

Predatory attacks are accelerating the destruction of international law

The State of the World’s Human Rights, and Amnesty International’s documentation so far this year, detail pervasive crimes under international law and mounting attacks on the international justice system, which are gravely harming the foundations that underpin human rights globally.

Israel has maintained its genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, despite the October 2025 ceasefire agreement, and its system of apartheid over Palestinians, while accelerating the expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and taking steps toward annexation. Israeli authorities have increasingly allowed or encouraged settlers to attack and terrorize Palestinians with impunity, and prominent officials have praised and glorified violence against Palestinians, including arbitrary arrests and the torture of detainees.

The United States of America has committed over 150 extrajudicial executions by bombing boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific, and carried out an act of aggression against Venezuela in January 2026. Russia has intensified its aerial attacks on critical civilian infrastructure in Ukraine, while Myanmar’s military used motorized paragliders to drop explosive munitions on villages last year, killing dozens of civilians, including children.

The United Arab Emirates has fuelled the conflict in Sudan by providing advanced Chinese weaponry to the Rapid Support Forces, who seized control of El Fasher last October after an 18-month siege of the city and committed mass civilian killings and sexual violence. In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the M23 armed group, with the active support of Rwanda, captured the cities of Goma and Bukavu and unlawfully killed civilians and tortured detainees.

In early 2026, the USA and Israel’s unlawful use of force against Iran, in violation of the UN Charter, has triggered retaliatory Iranian strikes on Israel and Gulf Cooperation Council countries, while Israel has escalated its attacks on Lebanon. From the killing of over 100 children in an unlawful US strike on a school in Iran, to the devastating attacks by all parties on energy infrastructure, the conflict has endangered the lives and health of millions of civilians and threatens to inflict vast, predictable and long-term civilian and environmental harm, impacting access to energy, healthcare, food and water across an already turbulent region and beyond.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban escalated its predatory policies against the female population, with further bans prohibiting them from education, work and freedom of movement, while in Iran, the authorities massacred protesters in January 2026, in what was likely the most lethal such repression for decades.

The USA, Israel and Russia further undermined international accountability mechanisms, and the International Criminal Court (ICC) in particular, last year. The Trump administration enacted sanctions against ICC staff, collaborators and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, while Russian courts issued arrest warrants against ICC officials. Several other states withdrew or announced their intention to withdraw from the Rome Statute and treaties banning cluster munitions and anti-personnel mines.

The vast majority of states have been unwilling or unable to consistently denounce predatory acts by the USA, Russia, Israel or China, or to chisel out diplomatic solutions. The European Union and most European states appeased US assaults on international law and multilateral mechanisms. They have failed to take meaningful action to stop Israel’s genocide or end the irresponsible arms and technology transfers fuelling crimes under international law around the world. They have also been unwilling to enact blocking statutes to protect the targets of US sanctions, including on ICC judges and prosecutors. Italy and Hungary declined to arrest individuals subject to ICC warrants in their territory, while France, Germany and Poland implied they would do the same.

“World leaders have been far too submissive in the face of attacks on international law and the multilateral system. Their silence and inaction are inexcusable. It is morally bankrupt and will bring nothing but retreat, defeat and the erasure of decades of hard-fought human rights gains. To appease aggressors is to pour fuel on a fire that will burn us all and scorch the future for generations to come,” said Agnès Callamard.

“Some may be tempted to dismiss the system built over the last 80 years as nothing but an illusion. This is to ignore the hard-fought achievements towards the recognition of universal rights, the adoption of multiple international conventions and national laws protecting against racial discrimination and violence against women, enshrining the rights of workers and trade unions, and recognizing the rights of Indigenous Peoples. It is to forget the poverty addressed, the reproductive rights strengthened and the justice delivered when states chose to uphold the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

“The political and economic predators, and their enablers, are declaring the multilateral system dead not because it’s inefficient but because it’s not serving their hegemony and control. The response is not to proclaim it an illusion or beyond repair, but to confront its failures, end its selective application and keep transforming it so that it’s fully capable of defending all people with equal resolve.”

Ramped-up assaults on civil society spread around the world

The proliferation of attacks on civil society and social movements deepened in 2025, with sustained efforts to silence and disempower human rights defenders, organizations and dissenters spreading to almost every part of the world.

Authorities in Nepal and Tanzania were particularly brazen in their unlawful use of lethal force to repress protests expressing political and socio-economic grievances. The governments of Afghanistan, China, Egypt, India, Kenya, the USA and Venezuela, among others, also violently repressed protests, criminalized dissent through counterterrorism and security laws, or used abusive policing tactics, enforced disappearances or extrajudicial executions.

In the United Kingdom, authorities proscribed Palestine Action, a direct-action protest network primarily targeting Israeli arms manufacturers and their subsidiaries, under overly broad counterterrorism laws and arrested more than 2,700 people for peacefully opposing the ban. The UK High Court ruled this unlawful in February 2026. The government is appealing the decision.

Turkish authorities detained hundreds of peacefully protesters after the arrest of Istanbul mayor and presidential candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu, who is among over 400 people facing politically motivated prosecution under alleged corruption charges.

US authorities launched an unlawful clampdown on migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, committing unnecessary and excessive use of force, racial profiling, arbitrary detention, and practices that amounted to torture and enforced disappearance. In Latin America, states such as Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela adopted or reformed legal frameworks that impose disproportionate controls on civil society organizations directly impacting their ability to operate, access resources, support communities and defend human rights.

Many governments, facilitated by corporate actors, used spyware and digital censorship to restrict freedom of expression and the right to information. US authorities used AI-powered surveillance tools to target foreign students expressing solidarity with Palestinians with arrest and deportation. Serbia’s government used spyware and digital forensics tools against student protesters, civil society and journalists. Kenyan authorities systematically deployed technology-facilitated repression tactics, including online intimidation, threats, incitement to hatred and unlawful surveillance, to suppress youth-led protests.

The USA, Canada, France, Germany and the UK, among others, announced or enacted sweeping cuts to international aid budgets, despite knowing they would likely result in millions of avoidable deaths, and in several cases while committing to massive parallel hikes in military expenditure. This has had a catastrophic impact on NGOs’ efforts to advance press freedom, climate resilience, and gender justice, to protect refugees, migrants and asylum seekers, and to provide healthcare and sexual and reproductive rights.

Many states continued to resist reining in the aggressive tax avoidance and evasion by billionaires and corporate giants while weakening further restraints on corporate power. In the USA, strategic lawsuits against public participation had a chilling effect on civil society, with one such lawsuit resulting in a court ordering Greenpeace to pay a fossil fuel company $345 million (reduced from an initial $660 million).

In a context dominated by the US president describing climate change as a “scam”, governments did nowhere near enough to address climate displacement, equitably transition away from fossil fuels, or adequately ramp up finance for climate action – even as the UN Environment Programme warned that the world is on track to reach 3°C above pre-industrial levels by 2100.

“What alternative do the bullies and predators offer to the imperfect global experiment they’re so intent on destroying? The world order they propose is one that mocks and discards racial, gender and climate justice, treats civil society as an enemy, and rejects international solidarity. It is built on silencing dissent, weaponizing the law and dehumanizing those deemed ‘others’. Their vision of the world is predicated not on respect for our common humanity, but on military force, trade domination and technological hegemony. It is, ultimately, a vision with no moral compass,” said Agnès Callamard.

Protesters, civil society and international bodies lead efforts to resist, disrupt and transform

Undeterred by adversity, millions around the world are resisting injustice and authoritarian practices.

Gen Z protests swept over a dozen countries in 2025, including Indonesia, Kenya, Madagascar, Morocco, Nepal and Peru, and around 300,000 people defied Hungary’s ban on Budapest Pride to defend LGBTI rights. Throughout early 2026, demonstrators from Los Angeles to Minneapolis have organized street by street and block by block against violent and highly militarized US immigration enforcement raids.

Mass demonstrations against Israel’s genocide spread around the world last year and humanitarians from over 40 countries launched flotillas to show solidarity with Palestinians. Global activism against the flow of arms to Israel expanded, with dockworkers in France, Greece, Italy, Morocco, Spain and Sweden seeking to disrupt arms shipment routes. Activism and legal pressure also led several states to restrict or ban arms exports to Israel.

While many governments appeased attacks on international justice, several states and bodies bucked this trend by demonstrating their commitment to multilateralism and rule of law. A growing number acknowledged that Israel was committing genocide and several states joined the Hague Group, a collective committed to holding Israel accountable for violations of international law, and contributed to South Africa’s case against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The Philippines handed former president Rodrigo Duterte over to the ICC to face charges of the crime against humanity of murder, and the court issued warrants against two Taliban leaders for gender-based persecution. The Council of Europe and Ukraine agreed to establish the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, and a hybrid court in the Central African Republic convicted six former members of an armed group for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The UN Human Rights Council established an independent investigative mechanism for Afghanistan and a fact-finding mission and Commission of Inquiry on Eastern DRC, and expanded the mandate of its fact-finding mission on Iran. Significant progress was made toward a binding UN tax convention and a Crimes Against Humanity Convention, and the ICJ and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued landmark advisory opinions affirming state human rights obligations to respond to climate damage.

More states have started speaking out against authoritarian practices and attacks on the rules-based order in 2026, with the Spanish government notably taking principled stands, but such calls must be backed up with decisive and sustained action.

“From city streets to multilateral forums, 2025 brought powerful displays of resistance and solidarity from protesters, diplomats, political leaders and many others around the world. We must build on their example and courage and forge bold coalitions to reimagine, rebuild and re-centre the global order around human rights, the rule of law and universal values,” said Agnès Callamard.

“Let 2026 be the year we assert our agency and demonstrate that history is not merely something imposed upon us; it is ours to make. And for the sake of humanity, the time to make history is now.”

MIL OSI

Back to index · Read original article

New Zealand First’s Shane Jones defends comparing India FTA to ‘butter chicken tsunami’

April 21, 2026

Source: Radio New Zealand

New Zealand First deputy leader Shane Jones. RNZ / Samuel Rillstone

Shane Jones says his parliamentary colleagues have told him to tone down his language but says he gets “cut-through on debates by deploying hyperbole” like calling Indians coming to New Zealand a “butter chicken tsunami”.

The prime minister said the comments in relation to New Zealand signing a free trade agreement with India are unhelpful – but stopped short of saying whether he thought they were racist.

New Zealand First does not support the India FTA, meaning National needs Labour’s support to pass it through the House.

In a video circulating online, the New Zealand First deputy leader said his party would “never accept” the FTA, and that “unfettered immigration” would drive down the value of wages, clog up roads, and overwhelm the health system.

“I don’t care how much criticism we get. I am just never going to agree with a butter chicken tsunami coming to New Zealand,” Jones said.

On Tuesday morning, Jones told reporters on his way into Parliament that immigration would be a key issue this election year and it is his view that “immigration has been snuck into the free trade deal in a way that does not reflect the expectations of Kiwis”.

He said he didn’t want to “cross words with the prime minister” but disagrees with his characterisation of what the FTA will and won’t do.

“I just say to the prime minister that New Zealanders are not going to tolerate unfettered immigration, ruining our foundation culture and clogging our services at a time we can hardly afford to upgrade the infrastructure that New Zealand has.

“The media will never cancel the Dalmatian Māori because he uses hyperbole and dismiss it as racism. Kiwis are flocking to my cause. Immigration, unfettered, unmitigated, has had a lot of negative impacts,” Jones said.

The senior Cabinet minister acknowledged some MPs had told him to tone the language down.

“There have been various members of the Parliament who have said: ‘Oh, come on, Jonesy. We know you like your one liners, but can you just taiho and talk in a far more prosaic term’,” he said.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins told Morning Report earlier that the comments were “racist at the least” and called on Luxon to be stronger in his language.

Speaking to media shortly before midday he added that if he were Prime Minister he would not put up with Shane Jones’ “racist” comments.

Jones said in an online video he would never agree with a “butter chicken tsunami” coming to New Zealand as a result of the India Free Trade agreement, which his party does not support.

“There is no room for racist rhetoric in any government that I lead,” said Hipkins.

“Any ministers who walk down that road will find that they won’t be ministers for very long.”

At his post cabinet media conference on Monday, Luxon said he had not seen Jones’ comments, but thought they were a “gross misrepresentation” of what the FTA was about.

“I don’t know. I’m just saying the immigration story that they are scaremongering around is absolutely false. We have taken them through the data, we have taken them through the details of that deal. We’ll continue to do so, because we would love them to rethink their position,” Luxon said.

“I appreciate they’ve got a pretty hard no against anything around free trade agreements. I just think that makes New Zealand poorer.”

Pushed on whether he thought Jones’ comments were racist, Luxon said it “doesn’t sound right”, and it was “alarmist” and “unhelpful” language.

“You can call it racist, you know, the colourful language from Shane Jones, we’re used to Shane Jones doing lots of oratorial flourishes as he is prone to do. But the bottom line for me is he’s wrong. There is not going to be an influx of immigration. This deal is well thought through.”

Luxon said he appreciated New Zealand First had its own position on the FTA, but that the position was “frankly wrong”.

“It creates huge opportunity for people that I would have thought New Zealand First would have cared about. Foresters, aquaculture, our farmers, our horticulturalists. This is a great deal.”

Standing next to Luxon, Immigration Minister Erica Stanford said the comments were “not helpful.”

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

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

Back to index · Read original article

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon survives confidence vote

April 21, 2026

Source: Radio New Zealand

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon speaks after surviving caucus meeting. RNZ / Samuel Rillstone

The prime minister has survived a confidence vote and will remain in charge of the National Party.

Emerging from a caucus meeting which lasted nearly three hours, Christopher Luxon read a short statement to say there had been intense media speculation about his leadership, and “who said what to whom,” and so he forced the vote to put it to rest.

The New Zealand First leader Winston Peters meanwhile, expected there would be “consequences” to the confidence vote.

Describing the conversation as “good and honest,” Luxon said the vote confirmed what he had been saying.

“I have the support of my caucus as their leader. Caucus has answered clearly and decisively. It has backed my leadership, and that matter is now closed.”

Luxon said if media continued to ask him about “speculation and rumour” he would not engage.

“Kiwis expect the media to ask us the tough questions about our policies, to hold us to account for our pledges to New Zealanders, and to interrogate us about the things that matter to them. They are not interested in the media soap opera,” Luxon said.

Following his two-minute long statement, Luxon walked away without taking questions.

It meant his caucus colleagues were left having to answer how the vote went, including whether or not it was unanimous.

National’s deputy leader Nicola Willis said by convention, the party held a secret ballot, with anonymous votes.

Nicola Willis. (File photo) RNZ / Giles Dexter

Only the scrutineers knew the result, and they were not allowed to reveal the numbers to the leadership or to the caucus.

Describing the result as “emphatic,” Willis said the vote would not have passed without a majority.

“One for all, all for one. And when the caucus, by majority, have confidence in the leader, then we all stand together, backing the leader. That is the decision the caucus made emphatically today,” she said.

“There can be nothing more definitive than the leader going to his caucus, asking them, ‘I would like to give you the opportunity to express whether you have confidence in my leadership,’ receiving a clear majority from the caucus and the caucus backing him.”

Some MPs said they supported Luxon, without revealing whether or not their support translated into a vote.

Referencing the “tikanga” of caucus, Tama Potaka said he would not divulge what happened in caucus.

Minister Tama Potaka speaks to media on Tuesday morning. RNZ / Craig McCulloch

“It’s like when you and I go on a rugby tour. What goes on tour, stays on tour.”

Northcote MP Dan Bidois described the conversation as “cathartic” but he did not know if the vote was unanimous, while Napier MP Katie Nimon said she was “100 percent behind our prime minister” but would not say if she voted for him.

Others, like Cameron Brewer, Mark Mitchell, Vanessa Weenink, and Todd McClay were more forthcoming in saying they had voted for Luxon.

Senior minister Chris Bishop also voted in support of the Prime Minister, and described the conversation in caucus as “good, honest and robust.”

Chris Bishop. (File photo) RNZ/Marika Khabazi

Bishop said National needed to stop talking about itself, and instead focus on the country in the middle of a fuel crisis.

“I think what the Prime Minister was saying, which I would broadly agree with, is that the country has very difficult challenges ahead of it and we should spend our time focused on those challenges.”

Defence minister Chris Penk said it was “really good to have a conversation and a lot of clarity, which as far as I was concerned we had in any case.”

The party’s junior whip, Suze Redmayne, also confirmed she had voted in support of Luxon, but what happened in caucus was private.

National’s senior whip, Stuart Smith, was absent from the caucus meeting, with the Prime Minister’s office releasing a statement on his behalf explaining he had a longstanding personal commitment.

Speculation over Luxon’s leadership had reignited on Friday after the New Zealand Herald reported Luxon had been evading Smith, who had been trying to tell him his support in the caucus was flagging.

Luxon, on Monday, said he was unaware of this, while Smith’s statement described the coverage as “speculative” and the prime minister had his support.

“I did not want to confirm that I did not contact the Prime Minister or his office seeking a meeting,” Smith said.

Willis said she spoke to Smith regularly, and last spoke to him on Monday.

“I said to him, ‘what’s all this palaver about you having asked for a meeting with the PM? Is that the case? If so, I missed it?’ And he said no, no I didn’t.”

Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said he was pleased to see his coalition partner was “stable” and was “drawing a line under any trouble they may have had.”

Seymour said the government had a lot of work to do through the fuel crisis, and trust in the media would increase if more questions were asked about that.

Peters said it was “not good,” and the public was entitled to expect stability in a government.

“This is a horrible distraction. We’ve got some serious issues, internationally occasioned, which is not our fault, and we’ve got to deal with them instead of wasting our time on this sort of stuff.”

Later, on his way out of the House, Peters said it was a “very bad” move.

“There’s always inevitable consequences. This is not the first time it’s going to happen, you see.”

Meanwhile, Labour leader Chris Hipkins said National should “absolutely” reveal the caucus vote.

“I think you have an obligation to demonstrate that the Prime Minister still enjoys majority support of the House of Representatives,” he said.

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said she was not interested in a “rearranging of the deck chairs” and was instead interested in changing the government.

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

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

Back to index · Read original article

Government’s plans for LNG terminal didn’t model international price spike

April 22, 2026

Source: Radio New Zealand

The government announced in February it would proceed with plans for a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility in Taranaki. RNZ

Modelling done for the government on its plans for an LNG terminal did not consider the effect of an international price spike, documents show.

A climate advocate said the decision not to model price volatility was “remarkable” and raised further questions about whether the planned facility was a good idea.

However, officials said although the current conflict in the Middle East had created volatility in LNG prices, longer-term price projections were still in line with the information the government based its decision on.

The government announced in February it would proceed with plans for a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facility in Taranaki, with the billion-dollar plus cost paid for through an electricity levy.

The proposal, widely criticised at the time, has attracted renewed opposition after Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz prompted the price of fossil fuels – including LNG – to spike.

Gentailer chief executives expressed doubts at the energy sector’s conference last month, prompting Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to say the government would not proceed if the business case did not stack up.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) said in a statement last month that the LNG terminal was selected from a shortlist of five options that it considered “timely, feasible and of sufficient scale to meet dry year needs”.

It would also be beneficial to major industrial gas users, who had been forced to limit production or shut up shop altogether in recent years as domestic gas supply dwindled, the ministry said.

The announcement had already had an effect on the prices electricity suppliers were paying for supply later this year, MBIE said.

“While forward prices will move around in response to a range of factors, electricity forward prices dropped substantially in the weeks following the government’s LNG announcement.”

Documents released to RNZ under the Official Information Act outline how consultants contracted by the ministry modelled the effect of an LNG facility on New Zealand energy prices.

The variables they tested included whether two or three coal- and diesel-burning Rankine turbines at Huntly are working over winter, how fast future renewable generation is built, and whether a private joint venture to build gas storage beneath the Tariki gas field in Taranaki goes ahead.

The model tested various scenarios with two international LNG prices: $20 and $25 per gigajoule.

It did not look at any higher pricing.

“[This] modelling has not considered the potential impact of international fuel price volatility,” the document said.

Undertaken before the current fuel crisis, the modelling said that, at the moment, New Zealand’s electricity system was currently “relatively insulated” from international energy prices.

That had been beneficial when international prices, especially LNG, spiked during 2021 and 2023 – when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine affected supply.

International natural gas prices have now increased again, after Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz, and Goldman Sachs recently said prices could increase by another 50 to 100 percent if the conflict with Israel and the US dragged on.

Lawyers for Climate Action executive director Jessica Palairet said the modelling reinforced “real questions about whether the LNG import facility is going to deliver”.

“The analysis did not consider the risk of international LNG price … which is quite remarkable.”

The model also assumed that supply of LNG would be unlimited and uninterrupted, an assumption that was being tested by the current situation, she said.

An MBIE spokesperson said the current conflict had created only “short-term volatility” in LNG markets,

“LNG futures prices for 2028/2029 remain consistent with the price assumptions that fed into earlier Cabinet analysis on LNG,” they said.

“Importantly, events in the Middle East do not impact the cost of the LNG import facility itself, nor the benefits of having reliable dry year cover in New Zealand.”

The modelling documents showed that having access to LNG had the greatest effect on New Zealand’s electricity system in scenarios where electricity demand was much greater than supply, the Tariki gas storage project did not go ahead, and LNG prices were low.

“If LNG is significantly higher priced than NZ gas, LNG will likely result in cost,” the documents said.

Savings were also much lower when supply and demand was in balance, and if there was additional gas storage available through Tariki – which emails between officials and consultants concluded would have a “high impact”.

An agreement to develop the Tariki project was signed by NZ Energy Corp and Genesis late last year, and early work has begun.

A Genesis spokesperson said there was no timeline yet for “this potential project”.

Significant parts of the documents were redacted, including the introductory pages of the final presentation outlining the results.

Jessica Palairet said what appeared to have been redacted was the full executive summary, including any conclusions the Concept Consulting consultants – who she said were “rell-regarded” – had drawn from the modelling.

“We don’t have the interpretation of the consultants of their own modelling, In some ways, they’re … the most important information in the entire analysis.”

“What’s been redacted appears to be what the modellers actually thought about their model.”

MBIE said those sections of the document, along with multiple smaller redactions, were held back to prevent the “free and frank exchange of opinions”.

Official Information laws allow for such redactions, provided that they are not outweighed by the public interest.

Palairet – who also received a redacted version of the same documents – said her organisation was challenging that decision with the Ombudsman.

“There’s a really strong public interest in releasing the full document. We’re talking about a huge expenditure in the middle of an energy crisis.”

RNZ has laid a separate complaint with the Ombudsman, asking for the redactions to be reconsidered.

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

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

Back to index · Read original article

Live: Christopher Luxon survives National leadership vote, refuses to take questions

April 21, 2026

Source: Radio New Zealand

Follow updates in our live blog above.

The prime minister says he has the full support of his caucus, as National MPs gather for the first time in weeks.

Parliament’s first sitting day since 2 April comes after a 1News-Verian poll showing the government would be out of power, and a New Zealand Herald report the prime minister had evaded National’s chief whip, who was trying to tell him that caucus support was flagging.

Christopher Luxon has denied he was avoiding Stuart Smith, and was unaware he had been trying to get in touch.

As they arrived at Wellington Airport ahead of a Cabinet meeting on Monday, ministers Mark Mitchell, Simeon Brown, Chris Penk, and Paul Goldsmith all defended Luxon.

Chris Bishop, Todd McClay, and Nicola Willis have also put their support behind Luxon in interviews in recent days, while Erica Stanford, stood next to Luxon at the post-Cabinet media conference, said she had not had any conversations with caucus colleagues about whether Luxon should stay on as prime minister.

On Monday morning, Luxon told Newstalk ZB there were “probably five people” that were “moaning and frustrated”, a number he later walked back on by Monday afternoon.

The number, Luxon insisted, was in response to media reports he had seen.

Responding to the polling numbers and his personal approval ratings, Luxon was “absolutely” confident he would still be prime minister after the caucus meeting.

Follow the latest with RNZ’s liveblog at the top of this page.

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

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

Back to index · Read original article

Live: Christopher Luxon faces caucus for first time in weeks

April 21, 2026

Source: Radio New Zealand

Follow updates in our live blog above.

The prime minister says he has the full support of his caucus, as National MPs gather in Wellington for the first time in nearly three weeks.