AM Edition: Top 10 Politics Articles on LiveNews.co.nz for April 1, 2026 – Full Text

Source: New Zealand Government

How can lessons from the COVID Response help navigate fuel shortages?

Thank you, Matthew, and thank you all for being here this morning. 

I’d like to speak plainly to you about the event affecting every part of business right now. I’d like to cast it through another lens we try not to think about, let alone see the world through.

Current situation

There is no point pretending this conflict in Iran is abstract or somebody else’s problem. As soon as the waterway that carries around one-fifth of global petroleum liquids consumption is thrown into uncertainty it becomes real for an isolated island nation like ours. Insurance costs, supply chains, energy markets, all the bills businesses pay, and the prices families see at the pump are all affected. 

Right now we have sufficient fuel stocks in New Zealand and we are working hard across diplomatic, commercial, and industry channels to ensure that remains the case. 

Here are the facts:

Our national fuel stocks continue to be robust across petrol, diesel, and jet fuel.

Latest projections show that New Zealand has 59.3 days of petrol supply, 54.5 days of diesel supply, and 50.4 days of jet fuel supply available nationally. We have five ships expected to arrive in coming days and another ten ships a few weeks away. 

Last week we announced a fuel plan detailing the planning in place for if this situation worsens. Introducing restrictions on fuel use is NOT the plan, but it is better to have a plan you don’t use than get caught with no plan at all.

Plan A is to keep working with energy companies and foreign governments to ensure supply keeps up. The supply-side comes first. So far, the available days of supply has bounced around, and people have argued over which ships to count, but supply has stayed over six weeks’ worth for the last three weeks. Our first goal is to keep it that way.

If, and only if, there is a risk of running out, would we go to demand-side restrictions. 

Finer details of the plan are still being worked on. Government departments are talking to people in different industries every day to work out how the plan could work if it came to that. 

There are still details to come, we are continuing to work on it and will give updates as soon as possible.

However, for now, we have enough supply, and our aim is to use the supply side to keep it that way.

Five lessons from the COVID response

Nobody wants to relive COVID, but that period had many lessons if we want to learn them. We’d be mad to ignore a live experiment in politics and policy during a scary global situation.

I spent those years in opposition, but I half joked that I wanted to be the ‘leader of the proposition.’ During that time we didn’t just criticise the Government, as was our party’s constitutional role, we also put up a series of papers about how we’d do it better.

Today we face another event that is global, could be scary, and has already invoked a response from Government. What a time to dust off some of those reflections from that time.

Avoid the time trap

The first and most important lesson was not to let the situation warp time. During COVID the Government slowed down time. The daily press conferences made 24 hours seem like a year, and the first 24 minutes we spent waiting to hear the day’s figures felt like a month.

We forgot that New Zealand would outlive the pandemic, and our country would have a big future, but decisions made then would cast a long shadow on that future.

The fiscal situation was the most obvious time warp victim. The figures were eye watering. The Government borrowed a net $100 billion in the four years from June 2019 to June 2023.

That’s why the financial support announced to date is:

Targeted, at low-income working households with children
Timely, it can be done with existing tax credits rather than creating a new mechanism
Temporary, it will end in either a year or when regular petrol falls below $3, linking it to the problem
Funded, it comes from within the allowance announced in the December Budget Policy Statement, so it will require savings elsewhere instead of new spending

The time trap lesson also puts a stark lens on some of the other proposals being put about. We’re told we should cancel excise taxes or road user charges, cancel road projects, or enable online learning. 

These ideas would all have long tails of effects that we cannot ignore.

Balancing human needs
Do it with, not to the people
Remember we’re all human, all New Zealanders
Learn from the world, and don’t reinvent the wheel

Education points to the second COVID lesson. We need to keep all of New Zealanders’ goals in perspective. I am still astonished at how quickly education was glossed over.

In many ways, education is the only investment that matters. Thoughtful people can solve lots of problems. Unthinking people can cause lots of problems. How educated the population is will trump any other variable across a generation. But, in the COVID time trap we abandoned it.

Last week I was asked countless times whether I thought students should be learning from home because of the fuel crisis. I said of course not, because we cannot afford to put education back at the bottom of the totem pole after working so hard to get students back at school. And I wondered, as I was being asked that question, whether attendance had actually fallen significantly. It hadn’t. We know that because we’ve made daily attendance data available online.

In response to a crisis, you have to think about all human priorities and you have to follow the facts. That’s why education, for one thing, is not going to be sacrificed in the event this Government needs to move to demand-side rationing.

The third lesson was to work with, rather than against people.  The COVID response took on its own momentum. By the end of 2021, we’d been in a state of crisis management for 18 months. The then Prime Minister’s nearly belligerent refrain ‘if you want to do x, y, or z, get vaccinated,’ confirmed she had gone too far.

But vaccination was only the most infamous flashpoint. Many others felt the response was being done to rather than with them.

There was the school that had its Australian approved RAT tests confiscated, how dare they, take initiative?! 

There were the Auckland restaurants who were told one morning they could open for the America’s Cup that day. They had to explain that they were very grateful but to serve lunch they needed to roster staff and order food the night before, at least.

There were the hairdressers and event promoters who showed they could operate as safely as very similar industries, but found deaf ears and frustration.

That’s why the Government has been working double time behind the scenes to do two things: Keep fuel supply up and be ready to manage demand as a last resort.

There are extensive discussions with businesses of every sector about how those steps are or would be taken. Rather than jumping to the podium, we are quietly making plans we hope to never use.

The Red Tape Tipline

We’re not only working with business and community to help solve problems we know about, we’re open to hearing new solutions altogether.

For all the briefings we get from officials – in fact I’d be at one right now if I wasn’t here – there will also be businesses on the frontline who are experiencing the strain firsthand and experiencing what is going on before a government department has figured it out.

If we’re learning lessons from our COVID approach, we might as well do the same from other countries. Taiwan implemented an approach during the COVID outbreak where they went ‘this is a tough time for everyone, since you’re the ones dealing with it every day, what do you need us to do to help?’. Through public feedback they were able to develop tools that improved their response, with apps that helped with contact tracing and collated data.

That’s why I’m also encouraging businesses to come directly to the Ministry for Regulation with areas we can relax regulations and support the response. 

In a disruption, every unnecessary delay matters. If there are rules, forms, approvals, or compliance requirements that make it harder to import, store, distribute, or use fuel efficiently, those issues should be identified now, not when the pressure is at its peak.

People can submit examples of regulations that could be reviewed, suspended, simplified, or better coordinated to support New Zealand’s fuel resilience via the red tape tipline.

This could include barriers affecting fuel transport, storage, distribution, local delivery, freight movements, business operations, or the ability of firms to adapt quickly to changing supply conditions.

The tipline has already fixed many things that matter to Kiwis, whether it’s allowing them to build sheds on their property, fixing scaffolding regulations and ending prohibition on medical conferences taking place.

Already there’s been more than 75 submissions, with some very interesting ideas. These are currently being analysed to see which amount to the most common-sense changes and will be able to have the most tangible impact on our response. I’ll have more to say on that soon. 

We are lucky to have democracy and due process. They give each person the dignity of being seen and heard. The COVID response was a lesson in what not to do. 

The closure of Parliament can be debated. Other countries closed more, our still functioned online at times, but there was something else I think we should worry about. 

People accepted the suspension of democracy and the rule of law so easily. When the Police Commissioner said the police would follow people around and perhaps ‘take them to our place’ without any actual law to enforce, people shrugged. When the Leader of the Opposition couldn’t get to Parliament, too many people including the media shrugged again. 

It’s essential that any possible restrictions on normal life are done clearly and transparently, with no short cuts on democracy or due process. That matters in a fuel crisis just as much as it did in COVID, because any move to ration demand or limit normal activity will touch millions of ordinary New Zealanders. If people are being asked to change how they live, they are entitled to know the rules, the reasons, and the legal basis for them.

Otherwise, you risk ignoring the fourth lesson, and people feel they haven’t been listened to. That’s when you get riots on the lawns of Parliament.  

New Zealanders during COVID could be forgiven for thinking we were the only country on earth. Everything had to be done our way, as if it was being done for the first time.

Those Aussie-approved thermometers being confiscated was a good example. Today we’ve already harmonised fuel standards with Australia, in stark contrast to that approach.

Like COVID, our isolation is a big factor in the current fuel situation. Then, we had several weeks’ notice as each variant crawled across the globe. Today, we’re tracing back ships coming to Marsden Point from Korean and Singaporean refineries, and then the ships going to those refineries. 

If we can see what’s coming, we can take time to prepare, and we can watch what others are doing to plan our own response. We should never be too proud to learn from another country. We’re pretty good, but we don’t have a monopoly on wisdom.

Why the response matters

We can’t let today’s crisis erode our country’s future. 

The latest Treasury figures put net core Crown debt at $191.4 billion. That alone is a reason to treat every new commitment seriously, because every dollar we borrow today is a dollar we lose the freedom to use tomorrow. 

Fiscal discipline is what stops the first shock being followed by a second one. It is what helps contain inflation pressure. It is what protects interest rates from staying higher for longer. And it is what means that if genuine hardship support becomes necessary, government can provide it without making everything else worse.

So, when we say do not take your eye off the fiscals, we are not changing the subject.

You can already hear the other instinct from the opposition. More spending. More intervention. More borrowed relief. More politics built around the appearance of action. That’s what would be happening if the other lot were in charge for this. 

With cool heads, we can respond to fuel shortages from the Iran war without committing the knee-jerk mistakes made during COVID.

It means understanding that our long-term future must not be eroded by short-term political theatrics. That is the approach we have to bring to this response.

We cannot prevent every external shock. But we can make sure New Zealand responds with fiscal discipline and common sense. That will be the evidence that we’ve learnt our lessons. 

Thank you.

MIL OSI

Source: Radio New Zealand

Analysis: Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will be juggling disappointment and elation when announcing his election-year Cabinet reshuffle on Thursday.

With senior minister Judith Collins set to become president of the Law Commission in the middle of the year, and Shane Reti also retiring from politics at the election, Luxon has a number of portfolios up for redistribution.

Collins currently holds minister of Defence, the Public Service, the spy agencies, digitising government, and space – as well as the Attorney-General, the government’s top lawyer.

Reti, who was on the receiving end of a big demotion in Luxon’s reshuffle at the start of last year losing health, still holds the portfolios of Universities, Science and Technology, Pacific Peoples and Statistics.

With both Collins and Reti in Cabinet, which is currently 20 ministers, it would make room for two elevations to the top table.

Chris Penk, minister for building and construction, veterans, small business, and associate defence minister has long been tipped to take over from Collins in the defence role.

Penk is himself a veteran and knows the portfolio well and is currently a minister outside of cabinet.

Asked by RNZ earlier this month if he wanted the job he refused to say yes or no, instead saying that was a decision for others to make.

Another possible contender to move inside cabinet is Minister for South Island, youth, hunting and fishing and associate transport, James Meager.

The former Beehive staffer is one of National’s rising stars and has the benefit of rural South Island roots, which would help bring some geographical diversity to the table.

Luxon’s reshuffle will only affect National ministers as the coalition agreements with Act and New Zealand First make any other changes too difficult.

For that reason, despite Brooke van Velden last week announcing her intention to retire at the election, she will keep her ministerial portfolios.

One of the biggest appointments Luxon needs to deal with is that of Attorney General.

While tradition means the role is usually held by a lawyer, it’s not a legal requirement.

That could leave the door open for Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith to take on the job.

He’s already filled in for Collins when she has handed her powers over due to conflicts of interest.

If Luxon wanted to stick with the usual convention, then Penk and Conservation Minister Tama Potaka are lawyers, and Housing and Transport Minister Chris Bishop holds a law degree.

It’s likely Bishop will shed at least one portfolio given the workload he is under and the huge amount of legislation, including the Resource Management Act reform work he’s in charge of, that still needs to work its way through the House.

Reshuffles always have winners and losers and it’s a balancing act for any leader to keep everyone happy.

While safe pairs of hands are required on the big jobs, there’s also an opportunity for Luxon to reward talented and hard-working MPs by promoting them to ministerial positions outside of Cabinet.

There would be two such spaces available on Thursday if Luxon fills vacant Cabinet positions with ministers currently sitting outside.

Hawke’s Bay MPs Catherine Wedd and Katie Nimon could well be in the mix, as could chair of the heavy-weight finance and expenditure select committee Cameron Brewer.

One MP who will be watching closely to see if he’s being brought back into the fold is former minister Andrew Bayly.

Last year Bayly resigned to the Prime Minister after an incident involving a staff member that he said didn’t meet the expectations he set for himself.

Bayly has already announced he won’t be running in his safe Port Waikato seat at the election due to his family moving south but has left the option of running on the party list.

That option is motivated by a desire to be a minister again but with Luxon extremely unlikely to entertain the idea, Thursday’s reshuffle will almost certainly confirm his exit from politics in November.

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Deputy Prime Minister is pointing to parts of the Covid-19 pandemic response the government will avoid in navigating potential fuel shortages, saying “our long-term future must not be eroded by short-term political theatrics”.

David Seymour, who was highly critical of parts of the previous government’s pandemic response, spoke to the Wellington Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday morning about “the event affecting every part of business right now”.

He said there was no point pretending the conflict in Iran was “abstract or somebody else’s problem” given the impact it had on an “isolated island nation like ours”.

He referenced current fuel stocks as being robust, and said “if, and only if, there is a risk of running out, would we go to demand-side restrictions”.

Seymour then outlined five lessons to learn from the Covid period, saying it would be “mad to ignore a live experiment in politics and policy during a scary global situation” given the country was facing another global event that “could be scary”.

1. Avoid the time trap

He said the first and most important lesson was not to let the situation “warp time”.

He said during Covid, the daily press conferences made “24 hours seem like a year” and the “first 24 minutes we spent waiting to hear the day’s figures felt like a month”. He also said the fiscal situation was the “most obvious time warp victim”.

To date during the current global situation, he said the financial support announced by the government in response to the current crisis was targeted, timely, temporary and funded.

2. Balancing human needs

Seymour said he was still astonished at how quickly education was “glossed over” during Covid.

“How educated the population is will trump any other variable across a generation. But, in the Covid time trap we abandoned it,” he said.

Seymour said he did not think students should be learning from home because of the fuel crisis, “because we cannot afford to put education back at the bottom of the totem pole after working so hard to get students back at school”.

He said education would not be sacrificed if the government needed to move to demand-side rationing.

3. Do it with, not to, the people

Seymour said the Covid response “took on its own momentum” and by the end of 2021, “we’d been in a state of crisis management for 18 months”.

“Many others felt the response was being done to rather than with them,” he said.

That was why the current government had been working “double time” behind the scenes to “keep fuel supply up and be ready to manage demand as a last resort”.

“Rather than jumping to the podium, we are quietly making plans we hope to never use.”

He also encouraged businesses to come directly to the Ministry for Regulation with suggestions for where regulations could be relaxed.

4. Remember we’re all human, all New Zealanders

He said when it came to democracy, the Covid response was a lesson in “what not to do”.

“People accepted the suspension of democracy and the rule of law so easily.”

He said any move to ration demand or limit normal activity would affect millions of New Zealanders, so people were entitled to know the rules and legal basis for them.

“Otherwise, you risk ignoring the fourth lesson, and people feel they haven’t been listened to. That’s when you get riots on the lawns of Parliament.”

5. Learn from the world, and don’t reinvent the wheel

He said New Zealand’s isolation was a big factor in the current fuel situation, similar to Covid.

“Then, we had several weeks’ notice as each variant crawled across the globe. Today, we’re tracing back ships coming to Marsden Point from Korean and Singaporean refineries, and then the ships going to those refineries.”

He said if the government could see what was coming, it could take time to prepare, and watch what others did to plan New Zealand’s response.

“We should never be too proud to learn from another country. We’re pretty good, but we don’t have a monopoly on wisdom.”

He concluded these lessons mattered because the government could not let “today’s crisis erode our country’s future”.

“Fiscal discipline is what stops the first shock being followed by a second one.

“So, when we say do not take your eye off the fiscals, we are not changing the subject,” he said.

He said with “cool heads” the government could respond to fuel shortages from the war without committing the “knee-jerk mistakes made during Covid”.

“We cannot prevent every external shock. But we can make sure New Zealand responds with fiscal discipline and common sense.”

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Deputy Prime Minister is pointing to parts of the Covid-19 pandemic response the government will avoid in navigating potential fuel shortages, saying “our long-term future must not be eroded by short-term political theatrics”.

David Seymour, who was highly critical of parts of the previous government’s pandemic response, spoke to the Wellington Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday morning about “the event affecting every part of business right now”.

He said there was no point pretending the conflict in Iran was “abstract or somebody else’s problem” given the impact it had on an “isolated island nation like ours”.

He referenced current fuel stocks as being robust, and said “if, and only if, there is a risk of running out, would we go to demand-side restrictions”.

Seymour then outlined five lessons to learn from the Covid period, saying it would be “mad to ignore a live experiment in politics and policy during a scary global situation” given the country was facing another global event that “could be scary”.

1. Avoid the time trap

He said the first and most important lesson was not to let the situation “warp time”.

He said during Covid, the daily press conferences made “24 hours seem like a year” and the “first 24 minutes we spent waiting to hear the day’s figures felt like a month”. He also said the fiscal situation was the “most obvious time warp victim”.

To date during the current global situation, he said the financial support announced by the government in response to the current crisis was targeted, timely, temporary and funded.

2. Balancing human needs

Seymour said he was still astonished at how quickly education was “glossed over” during Covid.

“How educated the population is will trump any other variable across a generation. But, in the Covid time trap we abandoned it,” he said.

Seymour said he did not think students should be learning from home because of the fuel crisis, “because we cannot afford to put education back at the bottom of the totem pole after working so hard to get students back at school”.

He said education would not be sacrificed if the government needed to move to demand-side rationing.

3. Do it with, not to, the people

Seymour said the Covid response “took on its own momentum” and by the end of 2021, “we’d been in a state of crisis management for 18 months”.

“Many others felt the response was being done to rather than with them,” he said.

That was why the current government had been working “double time” behind the scenes to “keep fuel supply up and be ready to manage demand as a last resort”.

“Rather than jumping to the podium, we are quietly making plans we hope to never use.”

He also encouraged businesses to come directly to the Ministry for Regulation with suggestions for where regulations could be relaxed.

4. Remember we’re all human, all New Zealanders

He said when it came to democracy, the Covid response was a lesson in “what not to do”.

“People accepted the suspension of democracy and the rule of law so easily.”

He said any move to ration demand or limit normal activity would affect millions of New Zealanders, so people were entitled to know the rules and legal basis for them.

“Otherwise, you risk ignoring the fourth lesson, and people feel they haven’t been listened to. That’s when you get riots on the lawns of Parliament.”

5. Learn from the world, and don’t reinvent the wheel

He said New Zealand’s isolation was a big factor in the current fuel situation, similar to Covid.

“Then, we had several weeks’ notice as each variant crawled across the globe. Today, we’re tracing back ships coming to Marsden Point from Korean and Singaporean refineries, and then the ships going to those refineries.”

He said if the government could see what was coming, it could take time to prepare, and watch what others did to plan New Zealand’s response.

“We should never be too proud to learn from another country. We’re pretty good, but we don’t have a monopoly on wisdom.”

He concluded these lessons mattered because the government could not let “today’s crisis erode our country’s future”.

“Fiscal discipline is what stops the first shock being followed by a second one.

“So, when we say do not take your eye off the fiscals, we are not changing the subject,” he said.

He said with “cool heads” the government could respond to fuel shortages from the war without committing the “knee-jerk mistakes made during Covid”.

“We cannot prevent every external shock. But we can make sure New Zealand responds with fiscal discipline and common sense.”

Watch David Seymour’s full speech in the player above.

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

MIL OSI

Source: Radio New Zealand

The same government that scrapped the Lake Onslow pumped hydro project has put it on the fast-track list. But whether this country can pull off a project of its size is another question.

It was hyped as the answer to the country’s energy anxiety – a giant “battery” in the deep south that could keep the lights on when the lakes run dry.

But when the coalition government was voted in, the project was voted out, deemed too big and too expensive.

Now, the Lake Onslow pumped hydro scheme is back – or at least, back in the conversation – thanks to a private consortium group, and somewhat ironically, the government has agreed to refer the scheme for possible fast-tracking.

“There’s a view that the fast-track system makes it a lot easier to consent to a lot of different things, but this is a really big project,” says Newsroom senior political reporter Marc Daalder, who has been covering the story.

“It’s hard to overstate how significant this would be, both in terms of its broader energy system and national economic impact, but also just in terms of the actual size of the thing they are proposing to build.

“And that’s the real question, right? People often say it’s hard to build things in New Zealand. Well, this is a really big thing. Can we build it?

“Recent history would suggest no, not without significant cost overruns and significant regulatory difficulty. The government likes to think that they have tackled those issues. I guess we will find out.”

Today, The Detail looks into the pumped hydro scheme concept, which is deceptively simple: pump water uphill when electricity is plentiful, then release it when it’s scarce, with energy stored at a scale never seen before in New Zealand.

Supporters say it’s exactly what’s needed to tackle the country’s biggest vulnerability – the dreaded “dry year”, when hydro lakes drop, gas runs tight, and coal-fired generation has to ramp up.

The Labour government liked the idea, but when they looked into it, the bill was around $16 billion, with years, likely more than a decade, before anything tangible would be delivered.

So in 2023, not long after being elected, the coalition government pulled the pin.

“The theory was, at the time, that the opposition to Onslow was that it was creating too much uncertainty in the market because it would have a really significant effect on the electricity market,” Daalder says.

“It would basically be buying a lot of power when power prices are low, in order to charge up the battery as it were, in order to pump that water up the hill, and then when power prices were high, it could be used to depress those because you could flick it on, like with the flick of a switch, and generate power.

“So it would bring up the low prices, but cap off the high prices; it would have quite a significant effect on the markets. There were concerns that people weren’t investing in new generation, as a result of that.”

But it turns out the project wasn’t dead in the water, with industry players circling and forming a private planning group. The Clutha Pumped Hydro Consortium includes former Meridian Energy chief executive and Transpower chairperson Keith Turner, former environment minister David Parker, Christchurch lawyer John Hardie, and Reserve Bank board chair Rodger Finlay.

Turner told RNZ’s Morning Report that they estimated their build would cost around $8-10b, and if successful, it could be up and running by 2035. International investors had already shown interest in the project, he said.

And now their plan is being considered for fast-track consenting that could, in theory, bulldoze through years of red tape – thanks to the same government that axed the scheme.

“I asked the Energy Minister, Simon Watts, who has spoken before about the chilling impact that the Lake Onslow project had on the electricity market, whether he was worried about it having a chilling effect,” Daalder says.

“He said ‘no’ but he said it is different because this is the private market, rather than the government making its decisions.

“I don’t know if that logic fully holds. We know that private players in the energy market can have significant impacts on investment decisions, so, for example, we often hear how the uncertainty over whether Tiwai Point would stay or go for five years – between 2019 and 2024 – meant that people weren’t investing in new generation because they thought if the smelter was going to close there would be all this power available.

“It’s hard to see why you would get a different result or a significantly different result, depending on who is actually funding it.”

In limbo

So, where does this leave Lake Onslow? Right now, it’s in limbo. Not quite dead, not quite alive, but very much in the realm of unfinished business with fast-track in its sights.

It was hyped as the answer to the country’s energy anxiety – a giant “battery” in the deep south that could keep the lights on when the lakes run dry.

But when the coalition government was voted in, the project was voted out, deemed too big and too expensive.

Now, the Lake Onslow pumped hydro scheme is back – or at least, back in the conversation – thanks to a private consortium group, and somewhat ironically, the government has agreed to refer the scheme for possible fast-tracking.

“There’s a view that the fast-track system makes it a lot easier to consent to a lot of different things, but this is a really big project,” says Newsroom senior political reporter Marc Daalder, who has been covering the story.

“It’s hard to overstate how significant this would be, both in terms of its broader energy system and national economic impact, but also just in terms of the actual size of the thing they are proposing to build.

“And that’s the real question, right? People often say it’s hard to build things in New Zealand. Well, this is a really big thing. Can we build it?

“Recent history would suggest no, not without significant cost overruns and significant regulatory difficulty. The government likes to think that they have tackled those issues. I guess we will find out.”

‘Too much uncertainty’

Today, The Detail looks into the pumped hydro scheme concept, which is deceptively simple: pump water uphill when electricity is plentiful, then release it when it’s scarce, with energy stored at a scale never seen before in New Zealand.

Supporters say it’s exactly what’s needed to tackle the country’s biggest vulnerability – the dreaded “dry year”, when hydro lakes drop, gas runs tight, and coal-fired generation has to ramp up.

The Labour government liked the idea, but when they looked into it, the bill was around $16 billion, with years, likely more than a decade, before anything tangible would be delivered.

So in 2023, not long after being elected, the coalition government pulled the pin.

“The theory was, at the time, that the opposition to Onslow was that it was creating too much uncertainty in the market because it would have a really significant effect on the electricity market,” Daalder says.

“It would basically be buying a lot of power when power prices are low, in order to charge up the battery as it were, in order to pump that water up the hill, and then when power prices were high, it could be used to depress those because you could flick it on, like with the flick of a switch, and generate power.

“So it would bring up the low prices, but cap off the high prices; it would have quite a significant effect on the markets. There were concerns that people weren’t investing in new generation, as a result of that.”

But it turns out the project wasn’t dead in the water, with industry players circling and forming a private planning group. The Clutha Pumped Hydro Consortium includes former Meridian Energy chief executive and Transpower chairperson Keith Turner, former environment minister David Parker, Christchurch lawyer John Hardie, and Reserve Bank board chair Rodger Finlay.

Turner told RNZ’s Morning Report that they estimated their build would cost around $8-10b, and if successful, it could be up and running by 2035. International investors had already shown interest in the project, he said.

And now their plan is being considered for fast-track consenting that could, in theory, bulldoze through years of red tape – thanks to the same government that axed the scheme.

“I asked the energy minister, Simon Watts, who has spoken before about the chilling impact that the Lake Onslow project had on the electricity market, whether he was worried about it having a chilling effect,” Daalder says.

“He said ‘no’ but he said it is different because this is the private market, rather than the government making its decisions.

“I don’t know if that logic fully holds. We know that private players in the energy market can have significant impacts on investment decisions, so, for example, we often hear how the uncertainty over whether Tiwai Point would stay or go for five years – between 2019 and 2024 – meant that people weren’t investing in new generation because they thought if the smelter was going to close there would be all this power available.

“It’s hard to see why you would get a different result or a significantly different result, depending on who is actually funding it.”

So, where does this leave Lake Onslow? Right now, it’s in limbo. Not quite dead, not quite alive, but very much in the realm of unfinished business with fast-track in its sights.

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

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

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Energy Minister is expressing confidence in the government’s plans to build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal, even as the Prime Minister says it will not go ahead if the business case does not stack up.

Two of the country’s gentailers have expressed their own doubts on the future of the terminal, while Labour has asked the auditor-general to look at the decision-making process.

The government intends to build a billion-dollar LNG import facility in Taranaki as a back-up to address dry-year risk.

Confirmation the government would proceed with the terminal was announced in February, shortly before the United States and Israel attacked Iran.

The ensuing energy crisis has led to LNG prices rises of 143 percent in Asia since 28 February, leading to criticism from Labour the government was signing New Zealand up to more volatile price spikes in the future.

A decision on procurement is due to be made by the middle of the year, with the aim of having the facility operational and receiving gas in 2028.

The prime minister indicated its future would rely on the business case.

“If it doesn’t stack up, we won’t be doing it. Until we see the commercials on it, we’ll make the decision then,” Christopher Luxon said on Tuesday.

Energy bosses express mixed views

Appearing at the energy sector conference Downstream in Wellington on Tuesday morning, gentailer chief executives were asked what the crisis meant for the LNG terminal.

“It depends which day you read the news, doesn’t it? I think LNG stands for ‘likely no gas’ to be honest,” Genesis chief executive Malcolm Johns said.

“The reality is that only 30 percent of New Zealand’s energy comes from electricity, 70 percent comes from other forms. Fifty percent of our overall footprint is imported, so we have a highly exposed energy system to the rest of the world. Whether you add LNG to that or not is not going to make one iota of difference to New Zealand’s exposure to the imported fuel regime to the world.”

Meridian chief executive Mike Roan agreed.

“It feels like the Americans might have put a bazooka, literally, through that proposal,” he said.

“I think it’s the challenge that we have as an industry, which is, how do we take charge of the resources that are at our fingertips and actually build out a resilient, secure, and affordable electricity system for not only today, but for the generations that follow? Because that’s what people were able to do before us.”

Others on the panel were more optimistic.

David Prentice, chief executive of the Gas Industry Company, said “first and foremost” the LNG terminal was about providing insurance for a dry year.

“We all have insurance in our homes and our cars, and we grumble and moan about it, but at the end of the day, I would bet that most people would still have insurance.”

Transpower executive general manager of operations Chantelle Bramley said LNG would bring new energy into a constrained system, and would buy New Zealand time to “build out” renewables.

“It gives us optionality. And in times of uncertainty, creating more options is actually a really good thing.

“We’re a tiny country at the bottom of the South Pacific. We are not an interconnected power system. There are things that will happen in our domestic market that at some point we’ll also want to be looking at that international fuel mix. The war in Iran won’t be going on forever, so I think that that optionality is also really important.”

Energy minister wants ‘a good deal’

Energy Minister Simon Watts said there were “two conversations” at play, involving the procurement of the import terminal and then the procurement of the LNG itself.

Watts said the government was proceeding with the procurement process “as planned”, but like any procurement process the government wanted to get “a good deal”.

Officials had advised him the procurement process was on track.

“First and foremost, we’re doing a procurement process to build a strategic LNG importation terminal. The second conversation is around procurement of that gas.

“Obviously, the procurement of the gas will be for winter ’28, which is obviously not on Tuesday, and that long-term contracting process will follow once the terminal is built. So we’ve got to separate out. There’s two conversations here. We’re talking about the procurement to build the ability to import.”

Watts said the underlying problem of a lack of gas to make electricity in a dry year remained, and a PwC report two weeks ago had outlined that not having gas in the economy would be “catastrophic” for regional jobs and GDP growth.

The PwC report said introducing LNG would help “stabilise total gas supply and prices,” as well as reduce structural scarcity pressures and restore confidence in the market to support an “orderly” gas transition.

“We need the capability to import, and then we need to do long-term contracting to get that gas when we need it, acknowledging we don’t know exactly when we are going to have a dry year, but having that insurance policy gives us more options,” Watts said.

‘A dangerous idea’ – Labour

Cabinet has delegated the authority for the contract to be signed off by the ministers of finance, energy and infrastructure.

Labour energy spokesperson Megan Woods said she was concerned it was not the “usual” way for a billion-dollar project to be decided on.

“There’s power to ministers to decide, rather than the usual kind of officials process that you’d have in a case like this,” Woods said.

“I’ve actually written to the auditor-general, and I’ve asked the auditor-general to look at that, because I think it is highly atypical that you’d be having political decisions around a billion-dollar project, when the government’s already shown that it doesn’t have the ability to think things through.”

Woods’ letter questioned whether the decision-making criteria at each stage was sufficiently clear, documented, and robust.

It asked the auditor-general to consider whether it was consistent with the Government Procurement Rules, as well as the Cabinet Manual and the auditor-general’s own guidance on procurement.

Of particular concern for Woods was whether the level of ministerial involvement in shortlisting and choosing suppliers was “appropriate for a procurement of this size and risk”, and whether that created a real or perceived risk to the independence and integrity of the process.

“The Cabinet material describes a process where the minister for energy approves the shortlist and a small group of ministers selects the preferred supplier. That appears to be a high degree of direct ministerial involvement in what is, at heart, a commercial evaluation and selection exercise for a very large contract,” her letter said.

Woods said LNG was “always” going to be a more volatile and insecure way for New Zealand to secure its energy system, and accused the government of brushing aside other ways in which it could be done.

“It was a dangerous idea when the government announced it. I think the last three or four weeks have just shown how precarious it is. New Zealand should not be banking its energy security on a volatile fuel like LNG.”

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Green Party says its decision not to select a former sex worker as a candidate has nothing to do with her background.

Sex worker advocacy group Fired Up Stilettos’ chairperson Bianca Beebe was not selected this year, with the group in a statement claiming the vetting process fixated on her former job, and that she was told it posed a reputational risk to the party.

“Much was made of her having previously advertised sex work online, and they asked how she would feel if the opposition found archives of those now-deleted photos,” the statement said.

“She quipped ‘all of my advertising photos were great, so it would be pretty funny to have people attempt to shame me by sharing photos of me looking amazing’.

“She pointed out that lots of adults-in and out of Parliament-share nude photos with other consenting adults, but that hadn’t prevented anyone else’s candidacy. The committee chair furiously erupted, ‘Who? Who is sharing nudes?’.”

The group said the Greens’ selection process included an intial interview, followed by an email with 28 questions, 21 of which related to sex work, and a subsequent interview with the party’s candidate committee.

The statement says the committee chair expressed concern about Beebe’s sex work past and activism would distract from the party’s messaging goals, including Beebe having done sex work while on a work visa.

But co-leader Marama Davidson has disputed those claims.

“We have always and will always continue to advocate for sex workers, for the role that sex work advocacy groups play in this country.

“Yes, we have criteria that keeps our party, the kaupapa and the applicant safe. The final thing, the process is confidential but we want to make it clear that there was no relationship to a sex worker background in the party’s decision on this.”

She said the party was not “at all” concerned about Beebe’s background, or that she may have been working illegally, or that political parties could use that to attack them.

“There are so many different reasons to make sure that candidates and applicants are ready to face the pressure of government, but I’ll be clear again, the sex worker background of the applicant did not have any bearing on the final decision.”

The Green Party’s candidate selection process has been changed ahead of the coming election after a series of personnel problems.

“We have had a new robust process come in and that process upholds the long-standing political positions and values of the Green Party. The bold and courageous positions we have taken when it comes to advocating for sex workers rights, when it comes to advocating for crime prevention, for example,” Davidson said.

“It is a process that better prepares and keeps candidates and the party safe.”

She refused to say why Beebe had not been selected, saying that was confidential – but it was not her past as a sex worker.

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is expected to announce a Cabinet reshuffle on Thursday.

He would need to reallocate the portfolios held by Judith Collins, who was set to become president of the Law Commission in the middle of the year.

Collins was minister of Defence, the Public Service, the spy agencies, digitising government, and space – as well as the Attorney-General, the government’s top lawyer.

Shane Reti was also retiring from politics at the election, and Luxon may want to give the Universities, Science and Technology, Pacific Peoples and Statistics portfolios to someone else.

Cabinet currently had 20 ministers, there were eight ministers outside Cabinet, and there were two Parliamentary undersecretaries.

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

Public Service Minister Judith Collins has shrugged off pressure from coalition partner ACT over the government’s English-first policy, suggesting the matter is not a key priority.

“To be frank, right at the moment, my concern is fuel,” she told RNZ. “That’s my big focus. I’m not too worried about everything else.”

ACT MP Todd Stephenson wrote to Collins a fortnight ago warning of “growing concern” that https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/505103/act-nz-first-hesitant-to-criticise-national-over-kainga-ora-name coalition commitments] were not being “visibly implemented” across the public service.

He pointed to the Public Service Commission style guidelines which still displayed the te reo Māori phrase “Te Kāwanatanga o Aotearoa” in bold above the English “New Zealand Government”.

Speaking at Parliament on Tuesday, Collins said she had responded with a “very nice” letter noting that changes would be handled on a “case-by-case basis”, with cost front of mind.

She said she was sure the commission would issue new guidance to departments “at some stage”, but its focus – like hers – was on the current fuel crisis.

“You’ve just got to [prioritise]… what’s going to make the boat go faster, and it’s possibly not style guides.”

Collins said she did not want agencies spending significant time or money on rebranding and expected any updates to be done as cheaply as possible.

In her letter to Stephenson, she said she had instructed officials to advise her on the potential costs and timeframe for reviewing the guidelines.

She noted that public agencies and Crown entities had recently been reminded to be “to be mindful of the fiscal environment, to minimise unnecessary expenditure associated with rebranding, and to learn from other agencies’ experiences to avoid undue costs”.

In a separate statement, Stephenson said the update would not be a significant change but would set an example for the wider public service.

“ACT does not support costly rebrands involving consultants or flash new signage and stationery. But Brooke van Velden delivered a digital-first rebrand at the Department of Internal Affairs for just $741. The Public Service Commission could follow her example.”

The National-NZ First coalition agreement included a commitment to “ensure all public service departments have their primary name in English, except for those specifically related to Māori”.

It also committed the coalition to require “public service departments and Crown entities to communicate primarily in English except those entities specifically related to Māori”.

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