PM Edition: Top 10 Business Articles on LiveNews.co.nz for May 8, 2026 – Full Text

Source: Radio New Zealand

News this week that the High Court at Auckland had ruled against ANZ in a class action over breaches of the Consumer Contract and Credit Finance Act was the latest move in a long-running saga.

But considering that no customers were left out of pocket by the bank’s errors, how and why could they be set to get more money?

What happened?

Between 2015 and 2019, the law said that a lender that was in breach of its disclosure requirements had to repay borrowers all the interest and fees they were charged during the time when they were not compliant with the rules.

Those disclosure requirements include that when a lender makes a change to a loan contract, it has to ensure that the full details are provided to the borrower.

ANZ provides loan variation letters when customers made changes to their loans.

But in 2015, it used a third-party developer to design and make changes to a software package that allowed it to generate these letters. This involved a loan calculator working out what the customers’ repayment amounts and loan terms would be.

But due to a coding error this calculator did not include interest that had accrued but not yet been charged when calculating new repayment amounts or loan terms, and so most letters contained incorrect information.

The bank said customers were undercharged about $2 a month.

In his judgment, Justice Geoffrey Venning acknowledged that it resulted in people paying less than they would otherwise have had to.

“To the extent their obligations were affected ANZ has compensated them for that. As a result, the plaintiffs are effectively better off than if the error had not occurred.”

What did the bank do to remedy it?

The bank fixed the problem in 2016 and reported it to the Commerce Commission in June 2017.

It also wrote to 101,535 affected customers and paid them a total of $5.591 million.

It entered a settlement agreement with the Commerce Commission and paid affected customers a total of $35.032 million, including the $5.591m it had already paid.

Starting in April 2020, ANZ wrote to affected customers informing them of the further payments to be made in relation to the error and paid out a further $29.44m.

So if people have ended up better off, why does it matter?

Economist Shamubeel Eaqub, who gave evidence as part of the action, said it was important that banks had systems that customers could rely on.

He told the court that a lender’s failure in this regard could erode trust in the market and made it harder to compare products, which reduced competition.

What will customers get?

The High Court said ANZ was required to refund the representative plaintiffs $32,728.42. They had borrowing of $650,000.

The plaintiffs were acting on behalf of about 17,000 customers who received inaccurate letters because of the error.

The bank has estimated it could have a maximum potential liability of $125m.

Earlier, ASB agreed to pay $135.6m to settle a class action against it for similar breaches. It said that each payout was either $571.82 or $285.91, depending on their circumstances.

Could this apply to other banks?

A change to the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act means that rather than requiring full repayment of the cost of borrowing in cases of a breach, in future the court would be allowed to decide what compensation was just and equitable.

That means that other banks would not be affected in the same way but the action against ANZ has been exempted from the change.

ANZ said it was considering an appeal.

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make and spend money

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

Source: Media Outreach

PARIS, FRANCE – Media OutReach Newswire – 7 May 2026 – Asendia, the international e-commerce and mail specialist, today announced a strategic partnership with Singapore Post (SingPost), a leading postal and e-commerce logistics provider. The partnership will strengthen cross-border e-commerce logistics capabilities, enhancing delivery performance, scalability and market access for businesses shipping into and out of Singapore and the wider Asia-Pacific region.

The partnership reinforces Singapore as a strategic gateway for cross-border e-commerce. With almost 75%^[1] of online shoppers in Singapore having purchased from overseas sellers, the country is a key destination for international sellers. It also serves as an important logistics gateway to millions of online shoppers in the APAC region.

Strategic Navigation of the 2026 EU Customs Reform

The partnership is timely as global regulators move to close taxation gaps that previously defined the sector. From 1 July 2026, the European Union will officially abolish the €150 de minimis customs duty exemption^[2], introducing a flat €3 customs duty on all low-value imports. These changes, aimed at leveling the playing field for traditional retail, have taken effect in a few countries since March, where authorities have imposed national handling fees. SingPost and Asendia are working to offer Delivered Duty Paid (DDP) solutions to the EU, providing a “frictionless corridor” to help merchants – navigate this transition.

“This partnership comes at a critical juncture for global trade. Following the US suspension of de minimis exemptions in August 2025, the upcoming July 2026 EU reform introduces new regulations for exporting businesses to navigate.” said Mark Chong, CEO, SingPost. “By extending our cross-border partnerships, we are providing businesses with the support to manage these complexities, ensuring that our customers can maintain access to these markets, minimising the risk of delivery friction or doorstep rejection.”

The collaboration builds on Asendia’s long-established presence in the region, including its recent establishment of the Singapore Hub operation. International brands and global marketplace sellers on platforms such as Amazon, eBay and Etsy will benefit from more streamlined parcel shipping into Singapore and the wider APAC region.

Through Asendia’s international network, SingPost’s Singapore-based e-commerce customers gain access to a more diverse, reliable set of options to sell and scale across new markets with delivery capabilities into Europe, North America, South America, the Middle East and Oceania, supported by a broad ecosystem of last-mile partners. In turn, Asendia’s customers benefit from improved access into Singapore, Southeast Asia and the wider APAC corridor via SingPost’s infrastructure.

Merchants working with both organisations will gain access to a comprehensive suite of delivery solutions. The core service offerings include Asendia’s e-PAQ Home Delivery, e-PAQ Out-of-Home Delivery and e-PAQ Returns.

Lionel Berthe, Head of APAC, Asendia, said: “Asendia’s Beyond Borders survey shows that 32% of retailers in APAC cite border delays, customs clearance, and cross‑border returns as key friction points. This partnership directly addresses those challenges, with Singapore as a core focus market, while enabling scalable and cost‑effective cross‑border growth across the wider region.”

Notes to Editors:
Beyond Borders Study:
Over 1,000 global e-commerce professionals were surveyed in early 2026. Respondents included senior decision-makers from retail businesses engaged in cross-border e-commerce across four regions: UK (259), USA (250), Europe (251) and APAC (253). The survey was conducted by Censuswide under MRS guidelines.

Hashtag: #Asendia #SingaporePost

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Media Outreach

CANNES, FRANCE – Media OutReach Newswire – 7 May 2026 – The Department of International Trade Promotion (DITP), Ministry of Commerce, hosted “Thai Night Cannes 2026” under the theme “Reimagining Thailand” at the Cannes Film Festival, highlighting Thailand’s new direction in the global entertainment and creative economy, and reinforcing its position on the international stage.

“Thailand is entering a new phase in the global creative industries, evolving from world-class filming destination into a source of original content and a strategic partner for international co-productions,” said Ms. Sunanta Kangvalkulkij, Director-General of DITP.

“Thailand has a strong creative foundation, supported by a new generation of talents with bold and distinctive storytelling. This aligns with the government’s policy to position the creative economy as a key driver of future economic growth.”

The event showcased tangible achievements of Thailand’s film industry on the global stage, including:

• Global box office success: “How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies” generated over US$73 million worldwide.
• International recognition: “A Useful Ghost” won the top award in the Critics’ Week section at the Cannes Film Festival.
• Rising global demand for Thai serices: Thai BL and GL series continues to gain popularity across Asia, Latin America, and Europe.
• Growth in international productions: 162 international productions were filmed in Thailand between January and March 2026, generating over US$36 million in production spending, supported by a cash rebate incentive of up to 30%.

Thai Night Cannes 2026 also marks a significant milestone, celebrating the 170^th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Thailand and France, reflecting long-standing cooperation in culture, trade, and creative industries.

At Marché du Film 2026, DITP led 15 Thai companies to participate in business negotiations and international networking under the Thailand Pavilion. Participating companies included GDH 559, Sahamongkolfilm International, GMM Studios International, and T&B Media Global.

The “Reimagining Thailand” vision represents a significant step in transforming Thailand from a globally recognized production base into a key partner in shaping the future of the international content and entertainment industry.

In addition, “Amazing Thai Night,” will be held at Annex Beach, Cannes in collaboration with the Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT), to showcase Thai culture, cuisine, music, and creative industries, while strengthening global partnerships in both tourism and the creative sectors.

Hashtag: #DITP

The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Radio New Zealand

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

Source: Radio New Zealand

A first time Nelson councillor may have to vacate her seat and face prosecution over a local government law Nelson’s Mayor has labelled “an ass”.

Nick Smith said councillor Lisa Austin was the victim of a daft interpretation of outdated rules.

The Audit Office agreed that the law had shortcomings, but said guidance for candidates was provided to all councils before the election and the rules meant a candidate could be made ineligible for election or disqualify them from office once elected.

Lisa Austin was a top polling candidate in the central ward at last year’s October local elections.

She co-owns Austin Transport Tippers with her husband that Nick Smith confirmed did not have any direct business with the Nelson City Council, but it did some work for two of the council’s contractors.

The Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act prevents people from being elected or appointed as a member of a local authority if they are “concerned or interested” – either personally or through a spouse or partner – in contracts or subcontracts from that authority totalling more than $25,000 per year unless the Auditor-General grants an exemption.

The Audit Office confirmed that the council had flagged Lisa Austin had financial interests in various subcontracts with the council when she was elected on October 16.

She was sworn in on October 30 – a week later, on November 6, the Audit Office said the council applied for retrospective approval of her existing contracts.

But the Auditor-General did not have the power under the Act to approve contracts between a council and a candidate when they were standing nor could contracts be approved after they became a councillor, the Audit Office said.

“The Act does not allow us to do that. We only have the power to approve contracts entered into after the person is elected.”

The Audit Office told the council that it did not have the power to retrospectively approve Lisa Austin’s subcontracts on April 17.

“While prosecutions under the Act are very rare, we are required to consider whether to prosecute individuals when breaches of the Act come to our attention. We intend to advise the council of our decision very shortly.”

Nick Smith said Austin had done nothing wrong and she had fully complied with registering her interests.

“She was democratically elected last October and it is neither fair to her – nor, more importantly, to the people of Nelson who voted for councillor Austin – for her to be excluded from council,” he said.

“The combination of the law being an ass and daft interpretations is undermining our local democracy.”

He was surprised when he received advice that the company’s work could potentially create a problem with the Act but council staff made a cautious approach to contact the Audit Office in November.

“Many approvals have been granted in the past. They’ve never been an issue. The assumption was made that it would be able to get the approvals from the Auditor General’s office,” he said.

Smith said it was difficult to quantify the value her company had received due to the nature of the work – it was estimated to be above the $25,000 threshold, but “nowhere near” a $1 million.

A by-election could cost ratepayers $200,000, he said.

The Audit Office’s view conflicted with that of Nelson City Council’s own legal advisor.

Smith had written to the Office of the Auditor-General to ask for a decision on whether Austin would be prosecuted as soon as possible.

“The difficulty with your legal team’s view is that it creates a catch-22 situation where a candidate cannot apply for approval prior to the election but neither can they apply after the election as a councillor,” Smith said in the letter.

Dismissing a councillor who chose to stand for the good of their community and had been an effective and constructive member around the council table could have a “corrosive effect on people’s public confidence in our local elections and people’s willingness to stand for council”, the letter said.

“The uncertainty is compromising the democratic governance of the city,” he said.

“I have some sympathy for the Auditor-General as the law is outdated and an ass. The Auditor-General has previously advised Parliament that this Act is ‘poorly drafted’, has ‘an unclear rationale’ and has said: ‘We have expressed doubts about whether the contracting rule continues to serve a useful purpose at all’.”

The council had been working with its legal advisers for months to get the approval.

Austin said she stood for council in good faith and had been careful to keep her business interests separate.

“This situation is very distressing,” she said.

“I do not feel able to participate in council meetings today and tomorrow with this hanging over me. I do not wish to resign and believe I have done nothing wrong.”

She had been transparent and open about her business interests, Austin said.

“I am aghast that I face the risk of being prosecuted and ousted.

“I am caught in a catch-22 situation where the Auditor-General will not consider an application from a candidate like me before an election and will not consider applications retrospectively after being elected as a councillor. I cannot understand the logic of why, if I was a councillor re-standing, I could get an approval.”

The Audit Office said the eligibility rules around contracting were an effect of the Act, not a decision of the Auditor-General.

“We have previously written to Department of Internal Affairs and the Minister of Internal Affairs about shortcomings of this 1968 legislation and intend to do so again.”

The Audit Office confirmed it had no power to remove or dismiss a councillor from office.

The maximum penalty under the law is a $200 fine.

RNZ has approached the Local Government Minister for comment.

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

The Government is progressing work to replace the Royal New Zealand Navy’s aging frigates as part of broader efforts to strengthen New Zealand’s Defence capability, Defence Minister Chris Penk has announced. 

“As a remote island nation, maritime security underpins New Zealand’s economic prosperity. Our safety, international connectivity and the vast majority of our trade is dependent on the sea,” Mr Penk says.   
 
“The New Zealand Defence Force has significant responsibilities in promoting and protecting these interests through a wide range of tasks, including monitoring activity in our waters, undertaking combat, patrol and interception operations, transporting people and equipment by sea, and supporting search and rescue efforts. 

“These activities rely on a resilient Navy, yet most ships in the current fleet are expected to reach the end of their design life by the mid-2030s, including the Anzac-class frigates. Without replacement, this would have a significant impact on New Zealand’s ability to protect its maritime interests in the Pacific and beyond.  

“The Government is addressing this by progressing a Maritime Fleet Renewal programme as part of the Defence Capability Plan, which will assess options for delivering a modern and combat capable fleet. 

“It is expected the future fleet will support a broad range of functions, including maritime combat, patrol and security, sealift, hydrography and diving operations, assistance to other government agencies, and support for humanitarian and disaster response.” 

Defence has begun discussions with the Royal Australian Navy and the United Kingdom’s Royal Navy to inform the next stage for potential frigate replacement and ongoing service arrangements.  

“Our decision to prioritise discussions with our partners and focus on considering the Japanese Mogami-class frigate selected by Australia and the UK’s Type 31 frigates to inform the business case reflects our need to be interoperable and leverage efficiencies,” Mr Penk says.  

“Further, we are looking at mature combat capable vessel programmes which are at a stage that allows adequate analysis against New Zealand requirements. A final decision has not yet been made, and advice is expected to be provided to Cabinet before the end of 2027.  

“In the interim, we are continuing to ensure the current frigates remain operational. We know this will be a significant decision for New Zealand and we are determined to work with our partners, focus on what is in our best interests and get it right.

“By planning for the replacement of our frigates and other naval vessels’ capability, this Government is ensuring our Defence Force personnel are equipped with the modern, combat capable assets they need to protect New Zealand’s interests, support our partners, and respond effectively to challenges at sea.” 

Notes to editors:  

New Zealand’s primary maritime combat capability is currently delivered through the two Anzac-class frigates, HMNZS Te Kaha and HMNZS Te Mana, commissioned in 1997 and 1999 respectively.
As outlined in the 2025 Defence Capability Plan, replacement of New Zealand’s Anzac frigates is an indicative investment for 2029-2039.
Selection of combat capabilities within the future fleet will be determined through the usual business case process.  

MIL OSI

Source: Radio New Zealand

• OECD says NZ economy recovering slowly, faces Iran conflict based challenges to growth and inflation
• Poor productivity, high debt, weak investment hold back growth
• Tax changes needed for retirement savings; boost needed for capital markets
• Electricity sector needs to break reliance on gas
• Quicker and deeper digitisation of health sector needed

New Zealand needs to reform the pension and electricity sectors, expand and strengthen capital markets, and speed up digitisation of the health sector, according to a report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

In its latest report on New Zealand it said the economy is recovering, but the Middle East conflict would delay growth and stoke a near term spike in inflation, while the economy also faced long standing challenges from low productivity, high public debt, and too little investment in key sectors and companies.

Growth of 1.4 percent was forecast for this year, rising to 2.3 percent in 2027, while inflation was expected to hit a high of 3.4 percent this year before falling back into the 1-3 percent target zone.

“Heightened uncertainty and higher energy prices weigh on real incomes, confidence and domestic demand,” the OECD report said.

“Inflation will rise in 2026 due to higher energy and transport costs before gradually easing toward the 2 percent midpoint, reflecting spare capacity and easing tradeables inflation pressures.

“Although considerable uncertainty surrounds the timing and magnitude of this adjustment, given the risk of further shocks.”

The OECD had a message for the Reserve Bank (RBNZ).

“Our advice is for monetary policy to remain focused on the medium-term price stability while looking through the temporary first round effects of the energy price shock,” OECD director Luiz de Mello said.

The report said the RBNZ’s monetary policy mandate should be held unchanged for five year periods to “reinforce the RBNZ’s strong operational independence and credibility”.

Raise superannuation age, change taxes

The OECD joined other international agencies in calling for the age of eligibility for superannuation to be raised by indexing it to life expectancy, with measures to take account of different ethnicities and work backgrounds.

It also called for a reversal of the taxation of retirement savings from the current charge on contributions and investment earnings but tax exempt withdrawals.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis said there were no plans to raise the eligibility age for NZ super, and rejected the call for tax changes as a big hit on government finances.

“We are trying to get the books back in balance so radical tax reforms that require a deficit on the government books are not something we are exploring right now.”

Other OECD suggestions included measures to improve capital markets, including government financial support, to allow small and medium sized firms to look at listing on the stock exchange and being able to raise finance in New Zealand.

Willis took a swipe at the major local banks that there was nothing stopping them now to lend more money to small firms and the challenge was for them to do it.

Reform the electricity sector

The OECD report also called for changes to the electricity sector to break its reliance on costly natural gas which has underpinned high prices.

“Affordability will remain elusive without breaking the gas-electricity price link by scaling non-gas long-duration firming, expanding demand response and strengthening competition.”

It said there should be a mandatory firming and flexibility market with likely a minority investment from the government in independent-led, long-duration non-gas firming generation.

Firming is the provision of immediate reserve electricity when renewable supplies decline. In New Zealand that has been done largely through burning gas and coal.

The OECD said the proposal to import liquified natural gas (LNG) should be seen only as a short term option.

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: Media Outreach

New report finds the real source of CMO complexity is not external but organisational, reframing modern marketing leadership as, at its core, a decision problem

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

Source: Radio New Zealand

Explainer – You’re reading this in English right now – but should English be an official language? Parliament is soon set to decide.

A long-running debate on the status of the most commonly spoken language in New Zealand is nearing its climax in Parliament, as the English Language Act works its way through the House.

During a fiery debate in Parliament back in February at the first reading, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters made his case for the bill while many opposition MPs firmly denounced it.

Peters called it a “common sense idea” and has said it fills an anomaly where Māori and English Sign Language are already both codified as official languages in New Zealand, but English is not specifically.

Others disagree. “Language is being used as a political football here,” said Dr Sharon Harvey, an associate professor specialising in applied linguistics at Auckland University of Technology.

The bill is currently before select committee with a report due to be presented on 3 September. The next step is a second reading of the bill and it’s likely it would come to a final vote before November’s election.

But what would the bill actually do? Here’s what you need to know.

What does the bill say?

Bills are often pretty darned long, but this one can actually be summed up right here – it’s only five lines.

It calls for Parliament to enact the English Language Act 2025, and says, “The purpose of this Act is to provide legislative recognition of the status of English as an official language of New Zealand” and that the Act would bind the Crown.

That’s it.

What would the bill actually do?

“The bill is so short because it doesn’t actually have any legal effect that needs spelt out in detail,” University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis said. “It will have literally no practical consequences at all.

“That isn’t an exaggeration – it will change absolutely no aspect of Aotearoa New Zealand’s current legal rules, practices or procedures. It’s the linguistic equivalent of passing an Act of Parliament that says: ‘The official colour of the New Zealand Rugby Team’s home jersey is black.’”

The bill doesn’t lay out any instructions, punishments or restrictions on other languages. It would add English as an official language alongside Te Reo Māori – which was designated in the Māori Language Act in 1987 – and English Sign Language, designated in the New Zealand Sign Language Act of 2006.

“While the bill is pretty slim in terms of its content it does serve symbolically at least to cast in legislation the pre-eminence of the already dominant and majoritarian language of NZ: English,” Harvey said.

Legislatively, it would not affect Māori and ESL, Geddis said, as they have “separately guaranteed (but limited) rights to use those languages”.

“Legislative language recognition was hard won for both Māori and the deaf community and so the English Language Bill also minimises the historical and contemporaneous importance of those difficult and long language struggles,” Harvey said.

As written, the bill wouldn’t even affect, for instance, signs that include Chinese language at some popular tourist spots, Geddis said.

“That legislative recognition does not add anything to English’s existing legal role and usage. You can use English for any official, public business now. If this bill passes, you will continue to be able to do so. Nothing will have changed.”

Watch: Winston Peters introduces the English Language Act.

[embedded content]

If nothing will change, why was this bill introduced?

Making English an official language was part of the coalition agreement between National, NZ First and ACT back in 2023.

Former NZ First MP Clayton Mitchell put forth a similar member’s bill in 2018 but it was never drawn from the ballot.

New Zealand First has pushed for such recognition for some time.

Did you know that English is not an official language? Well, we’re changing that by delivering on a key campaign promise – we are making English an official language of New Zealand. We will continue to fight for common sense ideas and work in the interests of all New Zealanders. pic.twitter.com/ki3dDh8tDI

— New Zealand First (@nzfirst) December 14, 2023

In introducing the current bill, Peters said that it’s correcting an “anomaly” that English is not included with the other two official languages.

“It has never been formally recognised in statute as an official language. This bill seeks to correct that anomaly, providing consistency in legal framework and clarifying the status of all three official languages in legislation.

“The bill does not diminish the status of other official languages, te reo Māori and New Zealand Sign Language, but rather complements them, acknowledging the linguistic reality of our nation.”

Peters said the bill is “affirming the value of English as a shared means of communication used by the mass majority of the population – I’ll say it again quietly: used by the mass majority of the population.”

Although his name is actually on the bill as the MP in charge, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith previously told RNZ that it wasn’t a top priority for National and did not speak at the first reading.

“It wouldn’t be the top priority for us, absolutely not. But it’s something in the coalition and it’s getting done.”

Peters has said that the rise in te reo Māori has “has created situations that encourage misunderstanding and confusion for all, and all for the purpose to push a narrative”.

“We have some very real situations now where communications and names of important services are using te reo as primary names and language, and the room for confusion and miscommunication is huge.”

He cited the possibility of confusion where places have had primary names in Māori.

“First responders, on their vehicles and in communications, being unable to get to places because they don’t know where they’re going; transport services with important road signs – they have all announced that.”

Harvey disagreed, saying the dynamic of Māori and English is what makes New Zealand special.

“Te reo Māori only exists in ANZ and so if it does not survive and flourish here it will not survive.”

“Most of us would recognise that Te Whatu Ora means health especially if it’s heading a letter with health information or is signage on a public hospital,” she said.

“There is no ‘danger’ to English now or in the future. Apart from anything else it is the pre-eminent global language.

“It would be so much better for NZ if we could all gain high proficiency in te reo Māori (as well as English) and if schools could be proactive in supporting students’ home languages, as well as teaching a variety of languages.”

Is English language use becoming a “culture war” issue?

Well, people on both sides of the debate of the current bill have accused the other of “virtue signalling.”

In Parliament, Peters said that “This bill won’t solve the push of this virtue signalling narrative completely, but it is the first step towards ensuring logic and common sense prevails when the vast majority of New Zealanders communicate in English and understand English in a country that should use English as its primary and official language.”

“The (bill) is virtue signalling to a small, monolingual in English, sector of the voting public by NZ First,” Harvey said. “It’s a waste of public money and time and should never have been agreed to as part of the National-NZ First coalition agreement.”

Debate at the first reading was equally heated.

“The English language is not under threat,” said Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick. “We are literally speaking it and debating in it right now. This is a bill which is an answer to a problem that does not exist.”

“The government wants to stoke a fight between te iwi Māori and Pākehā, and they want that fight to be the focus of this election,” she claimed.

At the debate, National MP Rima Nakhle called for calmer temperatures.

“We’re only making English official. It’s not the end of the world.”

Geddis said “the bill seems to be motivated by an odd form of linguistic jealousy – something akin to ‘it’s not fair that those languages get called official in a statute, but English doesn’t!’”

New Zealand First’s 2023 coalition agreement with National also stipulated that public service departments have their primary name in English and be required to communicate “primarily in English” except for entities specifically related to Māori. It has been seen in changes to how agencies such as the New Zealand Transport Agency or Health New Zealand are referred to.

Peters has also been vocal about the use of “Aotearoa” to refer to New Zealand by other MPs.

Other countries like Australia and the United Kingdom do not have any official laws on the books declaring English an official language, although it has de facto official status in government, courts and education.

In America, Donald Trump signed an executive order last year “designating English as an official language of the United States.” But as the decision was not passed by Congress and is an executive order, it doesn’t have the power to change existing federal laws and statutes. Around 30 US states also have proclaimed English the official language.

Will the English Language Act pass?

It’s unclear. It is part of the coalition agreement so National and ACT may be obliged to support it.

“Being that we are an English-speaking country, it is bizarre that we have to do this, but this is how far this extremism has taken our country,” Peters said in 2023 before the last election as he pledged to pass the bill that may finally be law soon.

“The bill very well may be rushed into law during the inevitable end-of-term use of urgency in the House,” Geddis said.

“Given current frosty relations between National and NZ First, there could well be some coalition partner reluctance to give NZ First time in Parliament to proceed with what really is nothing more than a form of legislative virtue signalling to its support base,” he said.

“Although National have publicly said they’re not concerned whether the bill passes or not, I think there is every chance it will pass which will be a great shame for NZ,” Harvey said.

“It’s a waste of the government’s time and considerably sets back New Zealand’s progress in righting the wrongs of our violent, colonial 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

MIL OSI