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

Source: Radio New Zealand

Winston Peters is “very, very confused” over the handling of official information relating to the Iran war, National’s deputy leader Nicola Willis said.

Foreign Minister Winston Peters said it was a “process mistake”, while National said he was putting politics ahead of the country.

The Prime Minister’s office in a statement, said Peters had admitted to Christopher Luxon in a private meeting his mistake in releasing emails about the official stance on the United States’ attack on Iran.

Peters publicly acknowledged his error on Thursday afternoon.

“In the end, I made the mistake. We carry the can in our office, we don’t blame others, but funnily enough a couple of my staff are going to be in a training session this afternoon on the matter,” he told reporters.

The emails suggested Luxon had been considering expressing “explicit public support” for the US assault, but Peters’ office believed that would be “imprudent” and “counter to New Zealand’s national interests”.

In the end, the government’s stance walked a more cautious line with no explicit support for the US but Luxon said in a post-Cabinet briefing this was no different to Australia’s stance – which was more supportive -prompted further questions about what the official position was.

However, Luxon’s office had since issued a statement saying the email release mischaracterised Luxon’s view, and claiming his doing so without consulting the prime minister’s office “clearly put politics ahead of the national interest”.

His office said the prime minister’s job was to challenge advice he received and he was merely seeking to test New Zealand’s stance against those of Australia and Canada.

Peters said it was a “process mistake” – but pushed back on suggestions releasing the information was an error.

“The assumption was that the prime minister’s office were doing the same thing, and we should have checked that first,” he said.

“I’ve been around a long time, longer than anybody else here, and I can recall even under the Muldoon government… the view was if it should be disclosed, disclose it if there’s no good reason not to.

“If you can release it, release it… I’m simply just saying I should have made sure that the prime minister’s on the same wavelength.”

National’s deputy leader Nicola Willis said the emails should not have been released by Peters’ office.

“No. Under the no surprises policy you consult before you release emails. If consultation had occurred it may well have been the case that they were released – the problem here is that the coalition agreement sets out very clearly that we will act in good faith.

“He now seems very confused. Very, very confused. One minute it was a mistake, next minute it wasn’t a mistake. Now I understand it’s a mistake again – and the problem with Winston Peters is you never know what you’re going to get.”

That was a reference to Peters telling Pacific Media Network various parts of the reporting of the matter were wrong.

“The claim that it was in the prime minister’s office was wrong, I mean how can you get that fact wrong? And then there’s other parts about it that are seriously wrong as well.

“I was under the understanding that things that should have happened had not happened, and I found out this morning in my office that those things did happen. Now I’m not going to make a big song and dance about it – but the truth will out and I intend to make sure it does.

“I acknowledged that I’d made a mistake and I found out this morning that I didn’t make a mistake,” he had said, but soon was admitting his mistake to reporters at Parliament.

Willis said Peters’ actions were inconsistent with the no surprises principle and were not in good faith.

“This is the problem with Winston Peters. What’s to say he won’t have a bout of similar confusion in coalition talks?

“Judge him by his actions. This is the man who put Jacinda Ardern into the prime ministership,” she said. “He has said that he won’t support a Labour, Green, Te Pāti Māori government, what if he gets confused”.

She suggested Peters’ actions could put coalition stability at risk.

“It’s really important to him that we ensure strong, stable government. And as I’ve said the actions of Winston Peters’ office were inconsistent with achieving that, and the prime minister has a duty to serve New Zealanders and we cannot do that as an executive if some political parties are off pursuing political gamesmanship rather than the national interest,” she said.

“When you release emails that characterise someone else’s position you consult with them. This is how the Official Information Act works… that doesn’t mean you’re always happy about the results of the consultation but you consult.”

National’s campaign chairperson Simeon Brown said the coalition was in a good space “but ultimately our message is that Mr Peters should not be putting politics ahead of the national interest. That’s very clear”.

“He’s been in parliament longer than I’ve been alive and he should know better,” he said.

“It’s standard practice when it comes to these matters that there’s consultation between offices. That didn’t happen … he considers himself a statesman well the reality is he should operate in a way that respects the office of the prime minister.”

Brown said Luxon had been wanting to test the foreign ministry’s advice in relation to what the Australians and the Canadians were saying at the time, but “our position’s very clear, he’s made that position very clear, and it still stands”.

The third coalition partner, David Seymour, played down the dispute.

“The coalition has had a joined up and consistent approach throughout this, I know what you want to talk about but people have discussions behind closed doors before we come to a position. I’d be much more worried if there wasn’t a discussion,” he said.

He diverted from questions about Luxon wanting to express explicit support for the war.

“I think the most important thing that’s happening in New Zealand today as far as the government goes is anti-money laundering legislation … I don’t even understand what your question’s about, most people won’t understand it or care, but actually this government is fixing what matters.”

He said the reporting of the dispute was “one person’s view of another person’s view of something that happened months ago, and the government had a united support position on it.

“The situation has changed so much since that time it’s kind of academic. All I’d say is that Australia and Canada, two of our best friends, came out with a certain position. We tossed up that position, we ended up taking a more moderate one.”

Seymour dismissed questions about whose office the meeting between Peters and Luxon was in.

“I know that there are people who argue about who’s meeting in whose office on which floor. Look, sometimes I meet with people in their office, sometimes I go and meet with them, sometimes I’m technically higher ranked than them, sometimes they’re technically higher ranked than me – well technically it’s only one time – but you know, I don’t think that’s really what matters to most Kiwis.”

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 Prime Minister says he called Winston Peters to his Beehive office on Wednesday night where he told him he expected better political judgement from his foreign minister.

Christopher Luxon said his coalition partner “acknowledged he had made a mistake” during that meeting after Peters’ office released discussions between the pair to the NZ Herald following an Official Information Act request.

The political spat between the two leaders broke out over the release of emails that show Luxon within days of the US-Israel war in Iran starting, wanting to move the Government’s position to showing “explicit public support” for the US.

But Luxon’s office said the emails released only show Peters’ office’s characterisation of the Prime Minister’s views.

“These emails mischaracterise the PM’s position. As you’d expect, it is the PM’s job to always challenge the advice he receives and, in this case, he sought to test New Zealand’s position against that of Canada and Australia,” a spokesperson for Luxon said in a statement to RNZ.

“The public statements made by the Government reflect the PM’s position. If they didn’t, they would not have been made.

“We were surprised to see Winston Peters’ office release internal discussions like these to the media, as our office was not consulted on this.

“The decision to release these discussions to the media clearly put politics ahead of the national interest.

“The PM would expect Mr Peters to show better judgement after more than 40 years in politics.

The Prime Minister met with the Foreign Minister on Wednesday night “to make that point and Mr Peters acknowledged he made a mistake”, the spokesperson said.

On Thursday morning RNZ contacted Peters for an interview, but a spokesperson said he had nothing further to add.

In late February the United States and Israel launched its attack on Iran, and just a few days later, on March 2, Luxon was on RNZ’s Morning Report for his weekly interview.

He was asked whether New Zealand supported the strikes, but Luxon would only go as far as to say the strikes were acknowledged.

In a public written statement, the same word was used by both Luxon and Peters, prompting questions about why New Zealand hadn’t joined other like-minded countries, such as Canada and Australia, in using the word “support”.

In the documents first released to the NZ Herald there are emails from staff in Peters’ office detailing it’s the foreign minister’s view that New Zealand does not “move towards explicit support, like Australia/Canada have expressed”.

“He sees value, from a foreign policy perspective, in walking the careful line we established yesterday via the written statement and in his stand up – which neither condemns nor gives explicit support to the US action”, the email stated.

“I think we’re going to need to try and come up with a drafting solution – which gives the PM clearer lines to use” but ultimately doesn’t substantively change the government position, the staffer wrote.

The email exchange and suggestion New Zealand shift its position came the day after the RNZ interview and a post-Cabinet press conference where Luxon, in both instances, struggled to clearly articulate the government’s position on the US-led war in Iran.

The Prime Minister declined an interview with RNZ on Thursday morning.

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

Analysis – National MPs say the coalition is stable, even as they criticise Foreign Minister Winston Peters for releasing emails without notifying the prime minister.

It is the latest in a series of fractures between the coalition parties that have been slowly expanding into cracks.

The question is whether those widening divisions can be sustained right up until the election, even as the parties jostle for dominance in a worsening global economic environment and against an opposition making gains in the polls.

Finance Minister and National deputy Nicola Willis had confidence in the coalition’s stability – but it came with a caveat: “As long as people uphold the principles of the coalition agreement.”

National’s campaign chair Simeon Brown said the coalition was in a good space, “but ultimately our message is that Mr Peters should not be putting politics ahead of the national interest. That’s very clear”.

Former National campaign chair Chris Bishop said the coalition was “a very stable thing, everyone said it would fall apart within a year and here we are six months out from the election and we’re getting things done for New Zealand”.

Mark Mitchell chuckled, saying the coalition was “fine”. Tama Potaka called it “solid”.

But with the cracks spreading, that solidity has been called into question with increasing frequency.

Here’s a look back at the last two weeks where it became clear the election had well and truly begun.

Communications breakdown: Emails and the national interest

Luxon’s office on Thursday said he had told Peters he expected better political judgement from him during a meeting in Peters’ Beehive office the night before.

In an extraordinary slapdown, Luxon said Peters “acknowledged he had made a mistake” by releasing emails showing foreign affairs staff pushing back against the idea of expressing “explicit public support” for the US attack on Iran.

Peters’ office believed doing so would be “imprudent” and “counter to New Zealand’s national interests”, but Luxon’s office said this mischaracterised the views of the prime minister, who was seeking to test New Zealand’s stance against those of Australia and Canada.

By releasing the emails without consulting the prime minister’s office, Peters had “clearly put politics ahead of the national interest”, Luxon’s office said.

Peters admits he should have consulted the PM about the release, but has pushed back on suggestions the emails should not have been released – arguing transparency is, you guessed it, in the national interest.

“In the end, I made the mistake,” Peters said in the afternoon. “We carry the can in our office, we don’t blame others, but funnily enough a couple of my staff are going to be in a training session this afternoon on the matter.”

Willis said releasing the emails without consulting was inconsistent with the no surprises principle and a breach of good faith, calling Peters “very, very confused”, and raising the prospect of that happening again in coalition negotiations.

“The problem with Winston Peters is you never know what you’re going to get.”

Despite his own confidence in the coalition’s stability, Brown said Peters “considers himself a statesman – well the reality is he should operate in a way that respects the office of the prime minister”.

Confidence in caucus and in coalition

It all follows another stain on the coalition agreement, with Peters claiming Luxon’s decision to call a vote of confidence in himself was a breach of that same ‘no surprises’ principle.

National MPs met for more than two hours last Tuesday after poor polling and increasing instances of National MPs leaking anonymously to the media.

Asked on Morning Report if Luxon should have warned him, Peters said it “would have been wise to – yes, of course”.

He said it was an “unprecedented” move from a sitting prime minister, and there would be “consequences”. It didn’t take long for his coalition partners from National to hit back.

Within the hour, Willis launched a broadside, saying Peters was “mischief-making” and he had a “track record of picking Labour over National, and that’s the risk you run with him”.

Luxon also lashed out, using his weekly interview on Newstalk ZB’s The Country to call his foreign minister out for installing Jacinda Ardern as prime minister.

He said had not needed to inform Peters of his confidence vote, because it was not important enough.

That afternoon, ministers on their way to Question Time declared the coalition as strong as ever – with Peters claiming it was as stable as a “three-legged stool”.

Free trade disagreement

Luxon’s criticisms of Peters on The Country also came with a sting in the tail, saying he was trying to “scaremonger” with “anti-immigrant” rhetoric – a reference to Peters’ stance on the free trade agreement with India.

The foreign minister in October had announced New Zealand First’s opposition to the deal just minutes before Luxon and Trade Minister Todd McClay were set to announce it had been finalised.

He has continued to rail against the deal’s investment and immigration provisions, with his deputy Shane Jones in April going further – warning he and his party were “never going to agree with a butter chicken tsunami coming to New Zealand”.

Questioned directly about whether that was racist, Luxon refused to say – only going so far as calling it “unhelpful” and that was certainly true for McClay, who was questioned about it by Indian media when he went to New Delhi to sign the deal this week.

With Peters’ criticisms of the confidence vote still fresh, Willis – in her weekly head-to-head with Labour on Morning Report – denounced the comment and said that was who Labour was “choosing to get into bed” with.

Never mind Labour having gone further than Luxon by calling it racist, and National being currently in coalition with NZ First, Willis has continued with this line – using her general debate speech on Wednesday to talk up the deal, and talk down New Zealand First.

“New Zealand First are on the wrong side of history on this one,” she said. “What we really need to call out in this House – and I want to acknowledge Marama Davidson for doing the same – is the race-based scaremongering that New Zealand First have indulged in.”

She went on to quote Jones, warning in a long preamble that it “will offend this House, it offended me … it has offended New Zealanders of Indian descent up and down this country”.

“Shame on you, Shane Jones. I enjoy working with you around the Cabinet table, but that kind of race-based rhetoric has no place in New Zealand politics,” she said.

Crossing the floor when the Cabinet room won’t do

Wednesday night also brought policy disputes into sharp relief, with a series of opposition party member’s bills that managed to find support from some in the government benches – but not others.

First among them was the Modern Slavery Bill, a joint effort between Labour’s Camilla Belich and National’s Greg Fleming, who said the ACT Party had stopped it going through Cabinet and becoming a government bill.

The topic was identified by Luxon in 2022 as something he would “march in the streets” for.

Another bill – from Labour’s Arena Williams – aimed to make transferring money overseas cheaper by requiring banks to be transparent about fees, got both ACT and NZ First on board.

National was the only party to oppose it, saying there was no need for it because other reforms were making progress on opening up the financial system.

And Green MP Kahurangi Carter’s bill aiming to prevent overdoses by giving amnesty for low-level drug offences to those who call in a suspected overdose or adverse drug reaction passed with ACT’s support – but not National or NZ First.

There was another member’s bill that was on the list for Wednesday but the House did not have time to get to which would ban social media for under-16s, in line with Australia’s approach.

It’s not something the coalition is progressing, with ACT opposing the idea and its MP Parmjeet Parmar complaining a select committee inquiry on it was “predetermined”.

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

Former Prime Minister Helen Clark does not think Winston Peters released emails revealing a clash over New Zealand’s Iran war stance to embarrass the prime minister.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon met with the foreign minister on Wednesday night following a political spat between the two leaders which broke out over the release of emails that show Luxon wanting to move the government’s position to showing “explicit public support” for the United States within days of the US-Israel war in Iran starting.

Clark told RNZ Nights the documents were subject to an Official Information Act (OIA) request.

“Winston Peters has made comments to the extent that he thought that the PM’s office was also in on the release.”

She said he had also taken responsibility that he should have checked this.

But Clark said typically anyone who was a subject of material in an OIA request would be told.

“So sometimes it can be stuff up rather than conspiracy,” she said.

But she questioned where the prime minister’s department was in it all.

“It’s a bit hard to believe that no one in DPMC [Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet] knew that this request had been made,” Clark said. “Why weren’t they following up?”

“I think … people have been caught napping here,” she said.

Luxon’s office said it was surprised to see Peters’ office release the internal discussions to the media, as it was not consulted.

“These emails mischaracterise the PM’s position. As you’d expect, it is the PM’s job to always challenge the advice he receives and, in this case, he sought to test New Zealand’s position against that of Canada and Australia,” a spokesperson for Luxon said.

“The public statements made by the Government reflect the PM’s position. If they didn’t, they would not have been made.

“The decision to release these discussions to the media clearly put politics ahead of the national interest.

“The PM would expect Mr Peters to show better judgement after more than 40 years in politics.”

Clark, who has previously worked with Peters while he was a foreign minster, believed his approach of being prudent and not weighing in on the US side was the right judgement.

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 National Iwi Chairs Forum (NICF) says the government has breached its Waitangi Treaty obligations to consult with Māori in proceeding with legislation that would weaken treaty clauses across a range of laws.

In a joint letter to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith and Regional Development Minister Shane Jones, the forum said it opposed “in the strongest possible terms, both the proposed legislative amendments and the process which has been followed to date”.

“The failure to engage with iwi and hapū is a direct breach of the crown’s Te Tiriti obligations, the very matter this process is supposedly seeking to clarify,” the letter read.

Goldsmith wrote to the forum’s Pou Tikanga co-chairs, Professor Margaret Mutu and Aperahama Edwards, on 2 April, providing an update on cabinet’s decision to proceed with a draft bill, setting out that no higher standard than “take into account” should be used to indicate the strength of the crown’s treaty obligations.

The letter invited the NICF to provide written feedback by 24 April and noted that the “select committee process will otherwise provide a sufficient opportunity for those with interests to have their say”.

The forum responded with the joint letter on 22 April, calling on the government to immediately withdraw the proposals, and meet with the NICF to “discuss and agree on a Te Tiriti compliant process by which improvements to relevant statutes are progressed”.

Both letters were released to the Waitangi Tribunal as part of its urgent inquiry into the removal of school boards’ legal obligation to give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, although the tribunal expanded the scope of the inquiry to include the proposed removal of other treaty references in the Education and Training Act.

Professor Mutu told RNZ before the release of the joint letter that the NICF had been asking since November 2023 to be included.

“We have struggled to get information out of the government as to what it is actually doing and we are a treaty partner, and yet they’re doing all of this change unilaterally,” she said.

Mutu said “take into account” is the “weakest possible form” of obligation to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

“Take into account simply means, well, you can have a look at what the principles might be and then you can ignore them.

“It’s effectively a mandate for those who are implementing the various pieces of legislation to ignore the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, so it is a huge shift.”

Luxon confirmed that he had seen the forum’s letter, but said the government would push forward with the legislation.

“The intent of this legislation is to make sure that we have very specific treaty clauses in there that pertains to legislation, so we’re actually clear on our obligations to each other.”

The government would continue to uphold treaty settlements, but the proposed legislation would address a “lack of clarity” in current law, he said.

Goldsmith didn’t agree that the government had breached any treaty obligations.

The proposed legislation was part of an ongoing conversation and consultation, he said.

“There are many points along the way that cabinet decides these things, we’ve made some initial decisions and now we’re going to draft legislation, that will go off to the parliament and select committee. There’s many opportunities for a discussion.”

Goldsmith said he planned to meet with the NICF soon.

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

Former Foreign Minister Phil Goff says he believes Winston Peters is undermining coalition partner National, with the release of discussions between Peters and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon over New Zealand’s stance on the Iran war.

The spat between the two leaders broke out over the release of emails that show Luxon, within days of the US-Israel war in Iran starting, wanted to move the government’s position to showing “explicit public support” for the US and Israeli strikes, which included allegedly hitting a girls’ school, killing scores of children.

Peters had been travelling in Latin America when he was alerted to the prime minister’s “wish” to express explicit support for the US-led military strikes.

“The minister considered this suggestion to be an imprudent course of action, which would run counter to New Zealand’s national interests,” a spokesperson for Peters said. “Experience matters in foreign policy.”

Speaking to Midday Report on Thursday, Goff – who served as foreign minister under Helen Clark – said usually a foreign minister that “deliberately sought to undermine the prime minister would be immediately sacked”.

“The fact Luxon won’t do that shows his weakness in relation to his coalition partner,” Goff said.

As leader of NZ First, Peters’ support is crucial for the ongoing viability of the coalition government. Goff said the “extraordinary” disagreement between Peters and Luxon raised questions about whether the coalition would last until the election, scheduled for November.

Luxon’s office said the released emails – released after a request via the Official Information Act – misrepresented his position, and said Peters acknowledged he made a mistake, the NZ Herald reported. Goff called that “nonsense”.

“There was no mistake about Winston Peters’ comments at all. He knew that exposing Luxon’s view would be damaging to Luxon and he wanted it to be. So this was quite deliberate.

“I’ve been in government long enough to know that if the first thing, a foreign minister would contact the prime minister and say, ‘Look, I’ve been asked for this email, what do you think? They would.’”

Goff said polls showed the New Zealand public was against the war, “which shows that the New Zealand public are somewhat smarter than Luxon and his Cabinet and his caucus”.

“But look, it’s not surprising that Luxon held that view. This is the same view that both Don Brash and John Key had over the Iraq War, when New Zealand sensibly decided not to be part of the invasion in 2003. Both Brash and Key were saying we should be in there, we should be supporting our allies. The same thing over the nuclear-free New Zealand policy and the Vietnam War.

“National has always had a track record of following the United States in every instance, rather than independently expressing New Zealand’s values and interests.”

Goff said National was losing votes to New Zealand First, and Peters’ party was happy to “cannibalise more of them” by associating Luxon with support of the US attack on Iran.

“You can get differences between the prime minister and the foreign minister, but normally they are handled appropriately and are sorted out. In this case, they have been deliberately exposed to public scrutiny and international scrutiny.”

Goff was sacked from his last formal government role last year, by Peters, after criticising US President Donald Trump.

‘Isn’t the most relevant thing’ – Seymour

Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour, who heads the third party in the coalition, ACT, called the clash a “storm in a teacup, sensationalised by headline writers”.

“You can report on it, but I wouldn’t,” he told Midday Report. “I mean, you can report whatever you like, by the way. I believe in press freedom.

“But I just make the comment that in terms of things that will make the boat go faster and improve New Zealanders’ lives, this isn’t the most relevant thing today.”

He said Peters should have given Luxon’s office a heads-up before releasing the emails.

“If he’s bound by the Official Information Act to release information, then he has to follow the law. Usually, for example, if I get an Official Information Act request, of course I can comply with the law and release the information that’s legally required.

“But if it concerns another minister either because it affects their area of responsibility or indeed it might be documentation or correspondence that wholly or partly originated from them, then of course you’ve got to be a team player and be collegial.”

Asked if Peters put politics ahead of the national interest, Seymour said: “That’s something that they can have out between them.”

Luxon declined an interview with RNZ on Thursday morning.

In a statement to RNZ, Labour leader Chris Hipkins said Luxon “blamed this war for our current fuel woes, when all along he backed it”.

“At first he said ‘all actions are justified’ which he claimed was a mistake, when clearly it was his view all along.”

Luxon’s actual line was “any actions”. He later said he misspoke.

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

Cervical cancer survivor Jen Jewell says she is one of the lucky ones – at least, if you can call anyone diagnosed with cancer “lucky”.

Speaking to a packed room at Parliament on Thursday morning, at the launch of the Cancer Society’s election manifesto, she told her story of finding abnormal cells in a smear test, aged 35.

Among the society’s requests, a fully-funded cervical screening programme at a cost of $21 million a year, and delivery on the 90 percent HPV immunisation target by 2030.

Each year, about 175 New Zealanders are diagnosed with cervical cancer and 55 die from it.

For Jewell, as for so many others, her diagnosis came as a shock.

“My world dropped out from under me,” she said. “But I was still so lucky. The cancer had been caught early. As soon as they knew what was going on, they told me, ‘It’s not a question of if we cure you, it’s a question of how’.”

In her case, the answer was radiotherapy, followed up with a small amount of chemotherapy.

Her treatment in New Zealand took six months – during which time some of the women she had met through a UK-based support group had not even had a follow-up appointment after finding abnormal cells.

And she now had a two-year-old son, born via a surrogate.

She said if she herself had been born just a few years later, she would have received the HPV vaccine at school, between classes without a second thought.

“When I think about the specialist care, the tests and treatments, the fertility preservation, the bureaucracy of surrogacy, all of which I’m endlessly grateful for, it’s staggering to consider that a simple vaccine could have saved all of that cost and work and time and pain.”

The Cancer Society, in its manifesto, has asked for a switch to a single-dose HPV immunisation schedule as soon as legislation allowed, and for increased funding for HPV immunisation awareness campaigns.

The vaccine also protected from five other cancer types – vaginal and vulval cancers, anal cancer, throat cancer, and penile cancer.

Right now, HPV vaccination rates were sitting at 59 percent.

Nicola Coom, the Cancer Society’s chief executive, said New Zealand had to dream bigger – by comparison, Australia was on track to eliminate cervical cancer by 2035.

“We have the tools, we have the knowledge, but what is required now is the commitment to act with urgency and at scale,” she said.

“If saving lives isn’t compelling enough now, how about the financial benefits? New Zealand spends around $35 million every year treating cervical cancer. For a similar cost, we could eliminate it.”

On Thursday, representatives from the various political parties spoke to their commitments.

Health minister Simeon Brown said an elimination plan was a priority.

“Through the Cancer Control Agency and other health agencies, we’re currently developing a national strategy to guide the system towards eliminating cervical cancer in New Zealand,” he said.

“This is one of the few cancers we have a real opportunity to eliminate, and we’re committed to making progress against this.”

MPs from ACT, the Greens and New Zealand First all threw their support behind early detection and better treatment.

Te Pāti Māori MP Debbie Ngarewa-Packer was not in attendance, and gave her apologies – she said she had been called home, and with two parents in cancer treatment herself, she “wholeheartedly supports this kaupapa”.

Labour’s health spokesperson and former health minister Ayesha Verrall said if Labour got into government, it would introduce free cervical screening “for all who need it”.

She said her party was committed to eliminiation, and its policy of three free GP visits per person would help with early detection.

“I was incredibly proud as Minister of Health to modernise the screening programme based on Bev Lawton’s research to allow HPV self-screening alongside vaccination – Jen, one of the initiatives that will mean cervical cancers like yours will be a thing of the past.”

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: New Zealand Government

Legislation which provides the Serious Fraud Office with more powers to go after criminals has passed first reading in Parliament today, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith and Police Minister Mark Mitchell say. 

“It’s estimated fraud in New Zealand results in billions of dollars in losses each year, and causes untold harm to countless hardworking New Zealanders and businesses,” Mr Goldsmith says. 

“We know the scale and complexity of fraud is increasing. It challenges the ability of law enforcement to investigate and prosecute the fraudsters who commit these serious crimes.

“We must regularly update our laws to adapt to advances in technology and how fraud is committed. It’s our responsibility to ensure New Zealanders aren’t left vulnerable to gaps in the law.

“Our government has a clear priority to reduce the number of victims of violent crime, but we will never neglect the fight against so-called white-collar crime,” Mr Goldsmith says.

“Our government is committed to fixing the basics in law and order, and that means ensuring law enforcement agencies have the tools they need to hold criminals to account, and to prevent more New Zealanders from becoming victims of fraud and corruption,” Mr Mitchell says.

“Currently, the SFO can experience difficulties obtaining all electronic evidence, applying for warrant when under time-pressure, and managing their own search scenes.

“We need to ensure there is no red tape preventing the SFO from doing their job and protecting New Zealanders,” Mr Mitchell says.

The Bill makes changes to provide the Serious Fraud Office with the authority to:

• Obtain all necessary digital and cloud-based evidence they require.
• Apply for search warrants orally.
• Manage their own search sites and prevent affected parties from interfering with investigations. 

The Bill also makes changes to the evidence admissibility provisions, to enable the Courts to apply the more modern and widely applied test in the Evidence Act 2006 to determine the admissibility of unlawfully obtained evidence. 

It also makes it clear Police can use all of their usual powers under the Search and Surveillance Act 2012, when assisting the SFO to execute a warrant.

MIL OSI

Source: New Zealand Government

Landmark reforms to Auckland’s transport system passed their third reading today, restoring democratic accountability and fixing the basics of how Auckland makes transport decisions, Transport Minister Chris Bishop, Auckland Minister Simon Watts, and Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown say. 

“These reforms deliver on the Government’s commitment to reset transport governance and restore democratic accountability to Auckland Transport,” Mr Bishop says.

“For 16 years, Auckland Transport has held powers that local councils manage elsewhere in New Zealand. That has meant Auckland Council hasn’t had the say it needs to govern and set the direction for the city’s transport.

“The new Act will give Auckland Council the opportunity to finally take the lead and enable Aucklanders to hold elected members accountable for transport decisions that will support Auckland’s long-term future and positively impact people’s daily lives through fit-for-purpose transport infrastructure.

“These reforms are another way we are making sure we deliver on Auckland’s transport priorities. Earlier this month, we signed the Auckland City Deal, which set out agreed transport priorities, including North‑West Rapid Transit, Botany to Airport public transport, Mill Road, and level crossing removals. We are also working closely on the additional Waitematā Harbour crossing, time‑of‑use charging, and more efficient transport network management.

“Responsibility for most transport functions will shift from Auckland Transport to Auckland Council, including all policy and planning work. The Council will become the road controlling authority and deliver transport capital projects while maintaining transport infrastructure.

“The reforms will establish a new Auckland Regional Transport Committee, bringing together Government and Auckland Council to establish long-term direction for the transport system. It will be responsible for preparing and delivering a 30-year transport plan for the city, which forms part of the Auckland City Deal.

“The new Act will also give local boards some new powers to ensure local accountability and that local communities have a say. They’ll make decisions on local and collector roads including setting speed limits, closing roads for events, managing parking and creating cycleways.

“Key roads with regional significance – including arterial roads, city centre roads, and those in the Eden Park precinct – will be the responsibility of the Governing Body of Auckland Council, consisting of the Mayor and 20 Councillors.

“I thank everyone who submitted on the Bill – from members of the public to Auckland Council and Mayor Brown. As a result of their valuable input, Government has been able to develop legislation that will pave the way for a more efficient, more functional, more connected Auckland.

“The legislation sets the foundations for restored democratic accountability, with Aucklanders able to hold their elected members responsible for transport policies at the ballot box. It also signals a much closer transport partnership between Government and Auckland Council. I look forward to seeing Auckland reap the benefits from this Act.”

Auckland Minister Simon Watts says the changes are about delivering the modern, reliable transport system the city deserves.

“For too long, Auckland Transport has failed to listen to Aucklanders and take their views into account. That’s why we’re changing the law,” Mr Watts says. 

“By putting decisions back in the hands of elected representatives, we’re restoring democratic legitimacy and ensuring Aucklanders can have a direct say in the transport policies that shape their city.

“An aligned approach between local and central government is critical to set long-term direction, make the most of shared resources and deliver regional and national transport goals.

“This is great news for Auckland. This Government is committed to improving transport in Auckland and putting decision-making back in the hands of Aucklanders. This will boost productivity and economic growth by providing for better accessibility, reduced congestion and increased urban density.”

Mayor Wayne Brown says these reforms deliver on his core promise to get Auckland moving by returning accountability to the region’s elected leaders.

“I was elected to take back control of Auckland Transport, and today we have delivered. We are returning decision-making to the people Aucklanders actually voted for. 

“Auckland Transport will be a much smaller organisation, solely focused on delivery of public transport services – with strong oversight from councillors.  Their job will be to make sure the buses and ferries show up on time, and to make the most of the City Rail Link.  

“All other roading functions will return to Auckland Council.  Our priority will be to look at standardisation, network optimisation and doing things the community actually supports, and delivering it better, faster, cheaper.

“Simply put, this is about giving Aucklanders their time back. An efficient, reliable network underpins our productivity and quality of life. This requires fundamental reform, not just more projects. It means casting aside costly, overdone schemes for smaller, smarter fixes that can be implemented faster.

“We look forward to working as partners with the Government to ensure transport decisions align with urban development and our long-term vision for Auckland’s growth. 

“For too long, there has been a mismatch between pipes, roads, and homes. Through the new Integrated Transport Plan, we are ending the era of siloed thinking. 

“I’m positive about our future.”

MIL OSI

Source: New Zealand Government

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will depart for Singapore on Sunday for the inaugural Singapore-New Zealand Leadership Forum and meetings with Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and President Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

“Singapore is one of New Zealand’s most important partners in Southeast Asia, and we back each other when it matters, including as global fuel and supply-chain disruptions put pressure on our economies,” Mr Luxon says.

During the visit, Mr Luxon will witness the signing of the Agreement on Trade in Essential Supplies, which will help New Zealand and Singapore keep essential trade flowing in times of crisis and supply-chain disruption.

“With a third of New Zealand’s fuel refined in Singapore, this relationship has a direct bearing on New Zealand’s economic security. Fuel is also part of the regional food-security story – diesel underpins New Zealand’s freight, farming and production systems that keep food moving to Singapore across the region.

“I spoke to Prime Minister Wong a few weeks ago on this matter and look forward to speaking again in person.

“The Forum will bring senior government and business leaders together to deepen trade and investment links, strengthen supply chains, and help both countries build greater resilience in a more uncertain world,” Mr Luxon says.

Mr Luxon will also undertake defence and security engagements in Singapore, returning to New Zealand on 6 May.

Minister of Finance Nicola Willis and Minister for Trade and Investment Todd McClay will accompany the Prime Minister.

MIL OSI