AM Edition: Top 10 Politics Articles on LiveNews.co.nz for October 17, 2026 – Full Text

Source: International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Geneva 15 October 2026

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) urges Norway to maintain its exclusion of nuclear weapons producers from the Government Pension Fund Global, following a government-appointed committee’s recommendation to open the fund to companies involved in the nuclear weapons industry.

The proposal would allow companies based in the United States, France and the United Kingdom – previously excluded for their involvement in nuclear weapons production – to become eligible for investment.

“Nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction, there is nothing ethical about them. The Norwegian oil fund is responsible for protecting the future for Norwegians. Investing in the companies manufacturing nuclear weapons, at a time of a nuclear arms race, makes it more likely that they will be used again. Norway would make itself complicit, knowingly, when nuclear weapons are used again.” said Melissa Parke, ICAN’s executive director.

The committee, chaired by former central bank governor Svein Gjedrem, presented its report to Finance Minister Jens Stoltenberg on 15 October. Presenting the recommendations, Gjerdrem argued that protecting Norway’s security provided an ethical justification for nuclear weapons production.

“We therefore believe it is ethical to produce nuclear weapons, as long as it is within the Non Proliferation Treaty,” he said. Stoltenberg also questioned the exclusion of companies involved in NATO’s nuclear deterrence. “Norway is part of this strategy, but the pension fund can not invest in the companies that make the strategy credible,” he said.

For ICAN, these arguments are not rooted in evidence. The Non Proliferation Treaty obliges five of the nuclear armed countries to negotiate the elimination of their arsenals, not maintain them indefinitely. Nuclear deterrence policies, as a global majority of governments have stated, increase security risks, not decrease them.

The committee is suggesting that Norway profit from the production of weapons of mass destruction, in disregard for humanitarian principles. The exclusion is based on the unacceptable humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons which do not change according to which country produces them.

As there are not many companies involved in the production of nuclear weapons, nuclear weapon exclusion policies have not had a significant impact on investor returns. Making an exception, would undermine a standard Norway has helped establish for responsible investment.

The proposal comes after France’s push to expand nuclear weapons cooperation across Europe. Though few details about the scope of this cooperation have been made public. Senior leaders in some French companies in particular have openly advocated for increased nuclear weapons development.

ICAN studies have shown that the companies involved in nuclear weapon production are spending millions lobbying politicians.

Parliament rejected a similar initiative just last year on 4 June 2025: A proposal from the Progress Party (Frp) to allow the fund to invest in weapons manufacturers producing components for nuclear weapons – was defeated by 90 to 12. No other party supported the proposal.

ICAN urges the government and parliament to uphold the nuclear weapons exclusion criteria and ensure that a fund intended to safeguard future generations does not invest in weapons that threaten their survival.

About ICAN

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) is a coalition of non-governmental organizations in one hundred countries promoting adherence to and implementation of the United Nations nuclear weapon ban treaty. This landmark global agreement was adopted in New York on 7 July 2017. The campaign was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize 2017, for its “groundbreaking efforts to achieve a treaty-based prohibition” of nuclear weapons. More information about ICAN can be found at: https://www.icanw.org

Source: Federated Farmers

Federated Farmers’ call for changes to the Sharemilking Agreements Act is gathering momentum, with the National Party now committing to a review of the legislation.

National’s agriculture spokesman Todd McClay has announced that, if re-elected, his party will review the Act to reflect the growth of contract milking, protect young entrants and reduce disputes.

The commitment is exactly what Federated Farmers has been advocating for on behalf of its members, the organisation’s dairy chair Karl Dean says.

“Last month, Labour said it would review the sharemilking laws if elected to government, and we challenged other parties to make the same commitment.

“It’s incredibly promising that National has today also thrown its support behind bringing the legislation into line with modern dairy farming.

“Both major parties have now committed to this, so that’s a big win. It means it’s definitely going to happen during the next term of Parliament.”

Dean says contract milking has become a common step on the dairy progression pathway, but contract milkers lack the same legal protections as sharemilkers.

“The legislation was written way back in 1937, when contract milking didn’t even exist. We need the law updated to reflect what the sector actually looks like today.

“Contract milkers perform much the same role as variable-order sharemilkers, but they sit outside the Act because they’re paid a negotiated rate rather than a share of returns.

“We know some contract milkers have struggled because they don’t have the same protections, and that’s simply not good enough.

“It’s time those protections were extended to cover contract milking too.”

There were 1,367 dairy herds operated by contract milkers in the 2024/25 season, representing 13.2% of all dairy herds.

Unlike variable-order sharemilkers, contract milkers aren’t guaranteed the minimum terms and dispute-resolution processes provided by the Act and Sharemilking Agreements Order 2011.

Instead, they rely on their individual agreements and general contract law, even where there’s a significant imbalance in bargaining power.

Dean says farm owners are also affected by the current legislation’s shortcomings.

“Sharemilking and contract milking are hugely important to our sector, giving the next generation a way to build their skills, experience and capital.

“These arrangements also give many farm owners a way to gradually transition out of the business.

“We need the legislation to reflect how farming businesses actually operate today, while retaining the flexibility that makes these progression pathways work so well.

“That’s good for everyone – both farm owners and sharefarmers.”

Dean says Federated Farmers sharefarmer chair Sam Ebbett and sharefarm owner chair Brendan Attrill have been instrumental in pushing for the review.

“They will also be instrumental when it comes to the actual review.

“Sam represents sharemilkers and contract milkers, and Brendan represents farm owners, so they bring both sides of the equation to the table.

“Having them both involved will be crucial to making sure any changes work for everyone.”

Federated Farmers wants a review to consider how the framework can provide appropriate and consistent minimum protections for comparable dairy operating arrangements, without turning independent operators into employees.

It also wants the law to recognise the nature of the work being done, rather than relying solely on how an operator is paid.

The organisation also wants the legislation to provide greater clarity around new revenue and incentive payments, and establish clearer, more accessible and proportionate dispute-resolution processes.

Federated Farmers wrote to the major political parties last month asking them to commit to reviewing the Sharemilking Agreements Act 1937 and Sharemilking Agreements Order 2011.

“We’re very pleased to have National and Labour on board, and we invite the other major parties to make the same commitment,” Dean says.

“Our dairy sector has been an absolute pillar of the New Zealand economy.

“Updating these laws will help protect the next generation of dairy farmers and ensure the sector goes from strength to strength.”

Source: VOYCE – Whakarongo Mai

16 October 2026

Care-experienced rangatahi from across Aotearoa will put politicians on the spot ahead of the election, questioning them directly on the issues that matter most to children and young people in care.

Hosted by VOYCE – Whakarongo Mai, the online pre-election political panel on Monday 19 October will bring together representatives from the political parties currently polling above five percent. The event is one of the few election debates in Aotearoa where politicians will be questioned exclusively by care-experienced young people, providing a unique opportunity to hear directly how parties plan to improve outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi in care.

Confirmed participants include ACT’s Karen Chhour, Labour’s Willow-Jean Prime, National’s Dana Kirkpatrick, the Green Party’s Kahurangi Carter, New Zealand First’s Kym McDonald, and The Opportunities Party’s Jessica Hammond, with Te Pāti Māori’s representative to be confirmed. Livestreamed on the VOYCE Facebook page from 6.00pm to 7.30pm, the event will give care-experienced young people the opportunity to challenge political leaders on how they plan to address the issues affecting their lives.

Designed by and for care-experienced young people, the discussion will focus on the real-life issues they face every day, including youth justice, mental health and wellbeing, safety in care, education, transitions to independence, and political parties’ commitments to VOYCE’s #6Promises.

VOYCE – Whakarongo Mai Chief Executive Tracie Shipton says she is delighted to see political parties embracing the opportunity to engage directly with care-experienced young people.

“We’re thrilled that these politicians are willing to step into this space and take questions directly from rangatahi with lived experience of care. It shows a willingness to listen, engage and be accountable to some of the young people most affected by government decisions. We know our rangatahi won’t be asking easy questions, and we’re grateful that political leaders are up for the challenge.”

Shipton says election campaigns too often overlook the voices of children and young people with care experience.

“Too often decisions are made about children and young people in care without hearing directly from those who have lived that experience. This panel turns that around, giving rangatahi the opportunity to question political leaders, seek answers, and hold them accountable for the commitments they make.”

Shipton says the event comes at a critical time in the election campaign, with many young people still deciding who will earn their vote.

“With many young voters still undecided, this panel provides a rare opportunity to move beyond campaign slogans and hear directly how political parties would improve the lives of children and young people in care. Rangatahi deserve clear answers about the issues that affect them most, and they deserve to know that their voices matter in our democracy.”

Questions have been developed by care-experienced young people themselves, reflecting their priorities, concerns, and hopes for the future.

The event will also examine how political parties intend to uphold the 6 Promises, a framework developed by VOYCE and care-experienced young people that outlines six commitments every child and young person in care should be able to expect, including being listened to, feeling safe, maintaining meaningful connections to whānau, and receiving the support they need to thrive.

“Rangatahi with care experience are the experts in their own lives. They know what is working, what is not, and where change is urgently needed. This is an opportunity for political parties to listen, respond, and show how they will deliver better outcomes for children and young people in care.”

VOYCE is encouraging caregivers, whānau, professionals, supporters and the wider community to tune in and hear directly from both young people and political leaders on the issues shaping the future of care in Aotearoa.

Event Details

What: VOYCE – Whakarongo Mai Pre-Election Political Panel

When: Monday 19 October, 6.00pm – 7.30pm

Where: Online via the VOYCE – Whakarongo Mai Facebook page
VOYCE political panel event

Who:

• Karen Chhour (ACT)
• Willow-Jean Prime (Labour)
• Dana Kirkpatrick (National)
• Kahurangi Carter (Green Party)
• Kym McDonald (New Zealand First)
• Jessica Hammond (The Opportunities Party)
• Te Pāti Māori representative (TBC)

Questioning will be led by care-experienced rangatahi from across Aotearoa.

Source: New Zealand Minerals Council

It is positive to see support for mining in the first cut of the policy direction that will make the Natural Environment and Planning Acts work as intended, says New Zealand Minerals Council chief executive Josie Vidal.

Today the minerals council submitted on the Illustrative National Policy Direction (NPD), New Zealand’s New Planning System – Testing the Approach to National Policy Direction, which is intended to translate the goals of the Acts that were passed just before Parliament rose for the General Election.

“Firstly, we hope this work continues after the election, and that the Acts are not tinkered with unnecessarily,” Vidal says. “We have to get resource management right in New Zealand so it is essential that the NPD provides the appropriate direction and balance if the new system is to be a success.

“While we are pleased the NPD offers good support for mining, we believe this is entirely appropriate given the role mining plays in the economy with jobs, work in regional areas, exports, and taxes, levies and royalties to the Government.

“It is important for us to be engaged in the process of finalising this policy direction so that we can highlight where there are inconsistencies and share industry knowledge of large complex projects such as mining.

“For example, we point out that we always need to consider that mining is locationally constrained. That means we can only mine where the minerals lie. It is really important when priorities, hierarchies, limits, competing land-use and zones are discussed, that constraint is front of mind.

“We have also noted some legislative inconsistencies. Some of the directives in the NPD are inconsistent with the new legislation, which has removed greenhouse gas emissions reduction from land use planning, given that it is more effectively dealt with under the Climate Change Response Act 2002.

“While we support New Zealand’s increasing interest in renewable energy, the directive in this policy, as it stands, could throw up all manner of unintended consequences. For example, it could prevent a council from consenting the expansion of a coal mine which may be necessary to supply fuel for industrial process heat or electricity in a region where there are no alternative energy sources.

“The reality is the world is not yet done with coal.

“Our bottom line remains that applications to prospect, explore and mine for minerals are always dealt with on a case-by-case basis. That comes with recognition of the value of an environmental management approach that allows for mitigation, remedying, offsetting and compensation to achieve better outcomes for both the environment and the economy than a prescriptive approach of environmental limits,” Vidal says.