This is a transcript of Audrey Young’s politics newsletter. To sign up for this newsletter or Friday’s subscriber-only Premium Politics Briefing, click here, choose your preferences and save. For a step-by-step guide, click here.
The person with most to complain about is Foreign Minister Winston Peters. He has trotted over half the globe meeting prime ministers, presidents and dignitaries in service to the national interest, delivered a speech at Gallipoli that Abe Lincoln would have been - indeed was - proud of, and for what? A fall in the polls that would see New Zealand First out of Parliament again if translated to votes. It will only reinforce to Peters’ party advisers that there are no votes in statesmanship. The way to be remembered is not through lofty speeches but by low-level street fighting and attacking the media, wokeness, the Treaty, and media wokeness over the Treaty.
That said, diplomacy goes on and Peters has a highly anticipated speech tomorrow night in which he is expected to set out New Zealand’s position on Aukus Pillar II.
There is a lot wrong with the tribunal and it certainly needs the review the coalition has promised this term. However, yesterday’s report is the best one I’ve read. It has good background, is short, sharp and makes a strong case as to why the Crown is not only breaching its obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi, but is doing something that may result in harm.
It is helped by a wealth of evidence in the form of written advice and appearances by officials who explain why section 7AA was introduced in the first place and how it will diminish trust in Oranga Tamariki. It acknowledges that the repeal is based on a political promise, not empirical evidence.
It points to the heart of the problem - an assumption on the part of the Government that the coalition agreement overrides or takes precedence over the Crown’s obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. The force of the report, incidentally, demonstrates how unnecessary it was for the tribunal to summon the Minister of Children, Karen Chhour, to give evidence. The summons was set aside by the High Court after Crown Law argued the power to summons was limited by comity and necessity. Yesterday’s release at least shows it did not need her evidence to produce a very good report. Sometimes less is more.
Whether or not the tribunal’s powers are limited will be tested again in the Court of Appeal tomorrow and on Thursday. The tribunal is no longer challenging the minister’s decision to refuse to give evidence, but the High Court decision setting aside the summons is being challenged by some of those who took the urgent case to the tribunal in the first place. It won’t alter what happens in this case because the inquiry is over, but it may have impacts on other commissions of inquiry.
Quote unquote
Yesterday: “So all programmes you put forward in the Budget will be fully funded for four years?” - a question to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon at his post-Cabinet press conference yesterday from RNZ.
“Correct,” says the PM.
Today: “Yesterday you said all programmes in the Budget would be fully funded over four years. Are you standing by that?”
“... There might be some time-limited funding but we’ll be transparent about that” - the PM corrects his answer 13 hours later.
Micro quiz
Name two MPs who originally contested the Green Party co-leadership against James Shaw after Russel Norman stood down in 2015. (Answer below.)
Brickbat
Goes to Labour MP Shanan Halbert, who described the Government’s appointment of former Deputy Prime Minister Paula Bennett as the new chair of Pharmac as “more jobs for your mates”. He must have forgotten that she replaced Labour’s old mate, former Cabinet minister Steve Maharey.
Bouquet
Goes to NZ First for putting the handbrake on National’s plan to abolish the newly created role of independent Inspector-General of Defence. (Hat-tip, Newsroom.)
Quiz answer: Kevin Hague and Gareth Huges. Vernon Tava, who was then a party member outside Parliament, was the other candidate.
Audrey Young is the New Zealand Herald’s senior political correspondent. She was named Political Journalist of the Year at the Voyager Media Awards in 2023, 2020 and 2018.