Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was right. He has inherited a recession.
Technically, economists require two consecutive quarters of data before calling a recession, but in the real world all the evidence suggests we are already there.
Across the whole year, gross domestic product (GDP) fell 0.6 per cent. In a year when New Zealand had record levels of net migration, that paints a grim picture.
Per capita, GDP was down 0.9 per cent.
It’s a terrible result. Once again a Labour Government leaves power with a shrinking economy. Grant has done it, and Michael Cullen did it before him (and the Cullen recession started prior to the GFC).
Go further back and the 4th Labour Government did some good stuff, but they left the incoming Government with a massive deficit. The 3rd Labour Government left an inflation rate of 14.7%. I wasn’t born when we had the second Labour Government, but you get the general trend!
The annual NZ Health Survey results were released yesterday and they’re great news in the smoking and alcohol areas, as the number of smokers and hazardous drinkers has dropped.
The drop in the number of smokers shows we are on target to get down to 5% by the end of 2025, without needing the measures passed by Labour earlier this year (which are not yet implemented), being effective prohibition. The current policy settings are working, primarily because smokers are substituting to vaping – which is far far less harmful (but not harmless).
The alcohol wowsers would also have you believe everything is getting worse, but the official data shows the opposition. Here’s the changes over time:
Smokers
Current smokers down from 18.4% in 2011/12 to 8.3% in 2022/23. Dropped 1.5% in last year alone.
Youth smoking (15 to 17 year olds) down from 8.3% to 1.0%!!
Maori smoking rate down from 40.3% to 20.2%. Dropped 2.1% in the last year.
Alcohol
Youth drinking (15 to 17 year olds) down in the last year from 56.3% to 50.9%
Hazardous drinking down from 18.7% to 16.0% in the last year
Youth hazardous drinking down from 10.2% to 6.3 over last two years
It was a hit exhibition connected to the juggernaut Harry Potter universe, one that began at London’s famed Natural History Museum, before travelling to Canada and Australia. “Fantastic Beasts: The Wonder of Nature… aims to inspire a love for nature and to raise awareness of conservation issues by highlighting to visitors their own relationship with wildlife and biodiversity.” Its next stop was to be Auckland, kicking off in March of 2024. The museum conducted a survey showing a willingness to pay that exceeded all previous exhibitions, and a large group of Harry Potter fans excited to have it arrive in their hometown.
Of the 500 people surveyed, a tiny minority worried about the views of Harry Potter creator JK Rowling – just two, one more than expressed concern about her implied support of witchcraft.
So they were offered a hugely popular exhibition that may have been their best selling ever exhibition, and support for it was overwhelming except for two out of 500 people who had an issue about the views of the creator, J K Rowling.
Read the full story for what happens next, but basically they spend months and months dithering, they have workshops, they hire an external consultant, they have senior staff vote 8-1 to proceed but they get spooked for a minuscule number of activists and cancel the exhibition.
They even debated about whether they could morally liver with JK Rowling making money from the exhibition. This was hilarious (in a pathetic way) because she doesn’t actually get any royalties from the exhibition, but even if she did she wouldn’t give a f**k about the amount of revenue compared to her massive income and wealth.
This is terrible decision making, in four ways.
95% of people can separate the art from the artist. Richard Wagner was a terrible person but his music is amazing. I can listen to his music happily.
The views that some people object to from J K Rowling are not extreme. Many public opinion polls have shown her views to be ones shared by the majority of adults. Now reasonable people can disagree on what she has said, and how she has said it, but its ridiculous to consider her outside the mainstream.
The museum paid almost no regard to the hundreds of thousands of NZers who would have loved to have gone top the exhibition. They just didn’t feature much at all.
The museum is funded around 90% by ratepayers. By turning down a hugely popular exhibition, the museum will run at an even higher deficit
Why should Aucklanders fund a museum that effectively censors what exhibitions they’ll host on such flimsy grounds?
Two of the former Government’s massive infrastructure programmes totalling $15 billion were rushed against the advice of officials leading to chaotic, costly blowouts just months after they were announced. …
He found that ministers received ample warning from officials prior to NZUP projects being announced that some would struggle to be delivered on time and on budget.
Ryan was also critical of the poor bookkeeping, which in some cases was so dire that to this day it is “difficult to determine from publicly available information all the initiatives that have received funding from the NZUP”, meaning the public can’t see where all of the $12b had been spent.
So the Ministers were warned the projects could not be delivered on time or budget, yet announced them all anyway as they were desperate for a poll boost.
And to this day, they can’t even trace where all the money went.
Also prior to the announcement, both the Ministry of Health and Treasury warned ministers that many of the proposed health projects under consideration for the NZUP were not ready to be announced.
Treasury warned it had “due to the time and information available”, they had “low confidence” the projects would be implemented quickly.
“On 29 January 2020, about one week after this advice was provided, the Minister of Health and Associate Minister of Health publicly announced several health projects. These included some projects that officials had advised were not ready to be announced,” the report said.
It found the Government appeared to be in a rush to announce the projects.
Isn’t this typical of Labour – their entire concern was the announcement, rather than actually delivering.
Ryan was particularly alarmed that the Government continued to spend large amounts of money without proper due process, despite a number of reports raising concerns about where this kind of rushed decision-making can lead.
“I have made similar observations about aspects of the Strategic Tourism Assets Protection Programme, the Cost of Living Payment, the Provincial Growth Fund, and – most recently – the reprioritisation of the Provincial Growth Fund,” Ryan wrote, listing a number of other schemes he had investigated.
“It concerns me that significant spending of public money continues to occur without appropriate processes for ensuring value for money and transparent decision-making.”
So as the AG points out, this was not a one off. Tens of billions of dollars were spent on programmes that had no real scrutiny about whether they were value for money. This was not a bug, but a feature for Labour.
“On December 7 I was sent a link to the Office of the Auditor-General’s report on its “Inquiry into Callaghan Innovation’s procurement process” as it related to a complaint laid by an organisation called Manaaki/We Are Indigo.
In this surprisingly detailed online media platform, posing as a media release, the Auditor-General packages his report into six conveniently summarised attention-grabbing chapters, to which are added six timelines, two appendices and a video (helpfully labelled – “without music”) where it seems to me he basically interviews himself.
However, the terms of reference the auditor-general set himself meant that he did not investigate any of the claims made by the founders against Manaaki/We Are Indigo, placing instead the focus solely on the due diligence process that uncovered the allegations, effectively removing the founders from what I believe is an important and long overdue investigation into the start-up ecosystem in New Zealand.
I accept I am not an expert in reviews such as these but I was surprised to see how frequently the auditor-general used the term – “In my view ….”. He used it 14 times, and what surprised me most was it looked like he seemed to use it to dismiss “evidentially” based opinions that had been provided to him that appeared to run counter to his view.
There are other examples of reports seemingly being side-lined in favour of the auditor-general’s views, but how would anyone know when the report has been presented in a way that doesn’t actually highlight that there are other views that might be equally legitimate.
The overriding impact of such a carefully managed media release is that it has successfully moved the discussion away from the alleged activities that created the need for a due diligence process, placing instead the focus solely on the process by which those alleged activities were uncovered. In my opinion, the founders have become pawns in a power game they have little to no influence on.”
Sir Ian clearly highlights another poor investigation/report by the OAG. I say “another” as the experience I (Alwyn Poole) has with them from 2018 – 2021 was the most bizarre I have experienced in “professional” life.
This included an extraordinarily long and incompetent process followed up by a press release (November 2021) that was factually inaccurate and clearly designed to cause harm. It should be noted that it was reported on by RNZ and NZH within two hours of release and without inviting conduct from the Villa Education Trust.
I comment on specific flaws in John Ryan’s report in substack post (link below). However, it is worth reflecting the circumstances of the press release.
When we challenged the press release Mr Ryan flatly refused to engage with us (none of the VET Trustees has ever been contacted by or had a conversation with Mr Ryan). He also flatly refused to correct his statement or challenge the way RNZ and the NZH used it. He has not apologised. In fact – in a response that defies logic Melanie Webb stated:
“In your email, you ask for a conversation with the Auditor-General and note you have not had an opportunity to engage with him directly. While the Auditor-General [John Ryan] was aware of the issues in this case and involved in finalising the report, the interaction with you and other parties during the inquiry was managed by the Inquiries Team you dealt with.”
On other words, although he made deeply harmful and inaccurate comments in a press release, and throughout the report, he knows very little about it and couldn’t care less. How can this even be approaching the standard the OAG is trying to say they expect of others? All impressions taken is that John Ryan is an odious and imbalanced individual without the professional integrity to speak to people that he harmfully and inaccurately press releases against. He also clearly heads an incompetent team.
Respecting the desire for brevity on a blog I have the full details of what I submitted to the Education and Workforce Select Committee here:
For those with public sector and legal minds please have a read. Feedback always welcome (and moral support it was, and remains a hard time). Because John Ryan was challenged back he has been like a Fox Terrier puppy with a prized sock and has ensure that VET is referred to in this year’s report on schools – based on 2018. I have not been on the VET for over two years and never had any financial decision-making or spending power (it is called a separation of duty John – you use them to manage conflicts of interest) – but this nonsense still irks and besmirches. In the report one suggest John Ryan made is that we should have written a book he had written a few years back … I didn’t even know he existed.
Comment to the Education and Work Force Select Committee on the OAG report into the South Auckland Middle School and Middle School West Auckland Designated Character School EBOT.
25th June 2022
Background/Introduction
During the time the OAG report related to the VET was made up of five people – all acting voluntarily in that role. Two of the Trustees indeed had no professional role in providing any of the education management services. The VET was established in 2002 and has been successfully audited as a charity every year. A Trust of this form has no “owners”.
In 2018 the VET and its employees had a huge range of responsibilities.
1) Oversight of Mt Hobson Middle School as a highly successful private school.
2) Oversight of South Auckland Middle School (SAMS) as a Partnership School (PSKH). I don’t know why John Ryan inaccurately refers to it as a “Charter School” in his report – that was never a legal term for those entities.
3) Oversight of Middle School West Auckland as a PSKH.
4) Oversight of the closure process of South Auckland Middle School as a PSKH including significant legal work with effectively having to terminate all contracts (employment and otherwise).
5) Oversight of the closure process of MSWA as a PSKH including significant legal work with effectively having to terminate all contracts and in-depth meetings with Ministry officials
6) Application and work on the establishment of SAMS as a new school under the Designated Character model. Including an extra external evaluation that no other organisations were subjected to.
7) Application and work on the establishment of SAMS as a new school under the Designated Character model. Including an extra external evaluation that no other organisations were subjected to.
In terms of the process of closing SAMS PSKH and MSWA PSKH the Ministry of Education informed us in no uncertain terms that it was a school closure and that there was no guarantee that our applications for the new schools would be accepted by the Minister. Under the terms of those contracts, it is also highly inappropriate that John Ryan included any information, amounts or inferences about the closure process. As the sponsor of those two schools the VET and all activities are outside the OAG jurisdiction and all references should be removed from the report. John Ryan knows this as he noted: “This inquiry is being carried out under section 18 of the Public Audit Act 2001, because it relates to a public organisation’s use of resources.” Neither the VET nor the SAMS PSKH, MSWA PSKH are/were public organisations. Incredibly poor work by John Ryan.
The two schools operated superbly throughout 2018 as PSKH and had notable metrics against schools of similar decile, size and year levels. Indeed, the Martin Jenkins final report on the PSKH model is a ringing endorsement of the schools including management, oversight and leadership.
Cognition Education reported: “In summary we find and conclude that in both schools, the management and staff are actively involved in continuous development, and the delivery, of a unique programme of teaching and learningwhich is based on a comprehensive ‘local’ curriculum that is aligned with the New Zealand Curriculum, and which provides for the personalised needs of priority learners ‘many of whom have been failed by the current education system.
Based on our findings and conclusions, and our experiences in a wide range of New Zealand State schools, Cognition has assessed the local curriculum, teaching and learning within both SAMS and MSWA as being unique and of a ‘special character’ when compared to that provided at ordinary state schools.”
To summarise to this point re the new schools. The VET applied to establish them. The VET was approved as “proprietor” (the legal term). The Minister appointed the five members of the VET to the combined EBOT for the two schools. The Minister acknowledged the quality of the governance, management and leadership and expressed an endorsement that we would do the new work of establishment.
The AOG took an extra-ordinary length of time and created huge amounts of stress and significant personal harm. When asked why things were taking so long they effectively told us they had bigger fish to fry. It took 18 months for them to carry out a report that has told us would not be necessary if the Ministry of Education assured them that there was no integrity issue. They subsequently directly refused to let us know what the Ministry had said early in the process until this appeared in the report and had come from the Ministry of Education.
[The Ministry told us that there was … no reason to question whether the [Establishment Board] and [Villa Education Trust] have acted in good faith and on a basis they deemed appropriate.
The report was, from that point, demonstrably, a waste of time. The Ministry appointed Governance Adviser had also commented:
We [the OAG] spoke to the governance facilitator engaged to support the Establishment Board during this time. He confirmed that a lot of work was needed and considered that no-one else other than Villa Education Trust could have done the necessary work. He recalled frequent meetings with Ministry staff at the time, and his view was that it was a new and challenging environment for all involved.
The two people who carried out the interviews gave every impression of being under-prepared and having significant cognitive dissonance in terms of every aspect of the process of the application and operation of the schools. They asked questions outside their purview and often appeared distracted and seemed to ignore responses – possibly leading to John Ryan’s comments on “lack of evidence”. It was also significant that the interviewers complained that four of our Trustees had a support person with them. On three occasions it was Karen Poole. The Trust complained about the approach of the interviewers to the OAG but Melanie Webb refused to speak to any of the Trustees to establish any grounds for the complaint. She simply asked the interviewers and they said they had done a good job. Hardly seems a good practice for an investigator’s office. Webb then wrote to us to remind us that the interview content was “confidential” and that we were expected to keep to that. Their interviewers said the Karen Poole being a support person could have “intimidated” the other Board members. They are people we have known and worked with from as far back as 1998. Karen is as intimidating as a Marmot.
(details – including legal challenge to AOG on interviewers conduct: alwynpoole.substack.com/p/the-role-of-the-oag-in-nz)
Concluding Statement from Alwyn Pooleto E&WSC.
I appreciate the Education and Workforce Committee’s interest in this matter. I consider in incredibly important that the John Ryan and the OAG is subject to effective oversight. Please do your job!
The Villa Education Trust, lead superbly by CEO Karen Poole, has done incredible work in the field of education and improved the outcomes of young people in the thousands. The organisation’s schools run efficiently and make such good use of funds that at SAMS and MSWA all school uniform, stationery and IT is provided for free and teacher student ratio is help at 15:1. Every official education report from ERO, Martin Jenkins, Cognition Education has been outstanding.
It is very hard to understand the way the John Ryan and team went about this process. The standards they claim to uphold in their evaluation of entities were by no means kept by themselves. Even the length of time taken shows deep inefficiencies.
The nature of the language used in both the report, as well as being incorrect in many places, also appears to be designed to cause maximum personal damage. The members of Ryan’s team seem to have taken personal dislike to Karen Poole as Trust CEO as evidence by comments from the interviewers and unfounded statements in the report.
It should be noted that the Ministry of Education were so supportive that they wrote the counter press-release to that of John Ryan.
John Ryan would have been aware of the public profile of the Trust and likely to have understood that his freewheeling press release comments would be picked up by media outlets. The three media articles remain up with harmful headlines and content that the members of the VET, let alone Karen Poole, do not deserve.
It is highly ironic that John Ryan and his team appear to have no level of being accountable for the harm they cause. At a bare minimum there should be a full and public apology & retraction of the report and press releases. Resignations would also be appropriate.
Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau has been plagued with allegations of serial leaking and dysfunction so, does this mean the council needs a Crown observer? Some of the city’s neighbours think Local Government Minister Simeon Brown should consider it but a law expert says they need to chill out.
There is growing concern that infighting and sniping at Wellington City Council is reflecting poorly on the wider region and may warrant Government intervention.
Things have got so bad that Greater Wellington Regional Council chairman Daran Ponter said newly appointed Local Government Minister Simeon Brown should consider appointing a Crown observer.
Having the Regional Council Chair call for central Government intervention at WCC is significant, even more so as Daran Ponter is a Labour Councillor, so this can’t be seen as motivated by partisan politics.
Handing over $40 million to a US multinational as corporate welfare is not commercially sensitive. It should be known to the public. And the Council clearly has a financial crisis with rates looking to double over five years.
Ponter said the council could bring in an experienced mediator, it didn’t necessarily have to be a Crown observer, but he said Brown should consider it if the council was unwilling to get help itself.
Simeon should give them three months to get their act together, and then appoint an observer if needed.
Joint statement from the Prime Ministers of Australia, Canada and New Zealand:
Australia, Canada, and New Zealand mourn every Israeli and Palestinian innocent life which has been lost in this conflict and express our condolences to all families and communities affected by the violence.
The loss of innocent lives on both sides is a tragedy for their families, and wider communitites.
We unequivocally condemn Hamas’ terror attacks on Israel on October 7, the appalling loss of life, and the heinous acts of violence perpetrated in those attacks, including sexual violence. We condemn Hamas’ unacceptable treatment of hostages and call for the immediate and unconditional release of all remaining hostages.
And politician that doesn’t agree with the above is justifying murder, kidnapping and rape as legitimate tools to achieve political ends. Likewise anyone demanding an immediate ceasefire that doesn’t include the release of remaining hostages is showing they don’t care about them.
We recognise Israel’s right to exist and right to defend itself. In defending itself, Israel must respect international humanitarian law. Civilians and civilian infrastructure must be protected. We are alarmed at the diminishing safe space for civilians in Gaza. The price of defeating Hamas cannot be the continuous suffering of all Palestinian civilians.
All good also. They explicitly state Israel has a right to exist (something 85% of Palestinians oppose) and defend itself, but stress the response must be within international humanitarian law and there is a limit to how far they can go in defeating Hamas.
We want to see this pause resumed and support urgent international efforts towards a sustainable ceasefire. This cannot be one-sided. Hamas must release all hostages, stop using Palestinian civilians as human shields, and lay down its arms.
An unconditional ceasefire rewards Hamas. Everyone wants a ceasefire, but it has to be more than just giving Hamas more time to rebuild their attack capability.
There is no role for Hamas in the future governance of Gaza.
Absolutely.
We support Palestinians’ right to self-determination. We oppose the forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza, the re-occupation of Gaza, any reduction in territory, and any use of siege or blockade. We emphasize that Gaza must no longer be used as a platform for terrorism. We reaffirm that settlements are illegal under international law. Settlements and settler violence are serious obstacles to a negotiated two-state solution.
I also don’t like the settlements. I would happily trade the settlements for peace.
We recommit ourselves to working with partners toward a just and enduring peace in the form of a two-state solution, where Israelis and Palestinians can live securely within internationally recognised borders.
The challenge is that only around 10% of Palestinians support a two-state solution.
Legislation to scrap the Reserve Bank’s employment mandate is being rushed through Parliament under urgency, with the opposition decrying it as “pointless” and a backward step.
The bill, being passed under urgency through all stages, is the first piece of legislation for the new government.
It would remove the Reserve Bank’s dual-mandate, meaning it would no longer be required to push for maximum sustainable employment levels across the country.
This would leave it able to focus solely on its other mandate of keeping inflation in the target range of between 1 and 3 percent: avoiding the dangers of deflation where costs go down, while keeping costs from rising too steeply.
Labour had brought the dual mandate in after campaigning on it in 2017, saying a focus on employment would contribute to the overall health of the economy. National and ACT campaigned this year on returning to the single target, saying this would keep it focused on inflation.
The dual mandate means the Reserve Bank has conflicting instructions. A sole mandate of keeping inflation below 3% is not pointless to the millions of New Zealanders who have suffered from runaway inflation for the last two years.
Assaults and unlawful behaviour within Oranga Tamariki’s youth justice facilities are unacceptable and offenders should receive proper consequences for their actions, Minister for Children Karen Chhour says.
“Last night a fight broke out in the Muriwai Unit at Te Puna Wai Youth Justice Residence in Christchurch. Five young people have been identified as instigating the fight and five staff members and three young people have suffered injuries.
“I have requested advice on what current procedures are in place for incidents like this and what more can be done to ensure serious young offenders are held to account for their actions.
“Under the previous government offenders assaulted staff and broke out of facilities and fast food was given to bribe them to stop. If people within youth justice facilities cause trouble they should expect to see real consequences for their actions.
“By restoring the value of right and wrong we will have better outcomes in youth justice facilities. This government is focussed on dealing with serious youth crime and young people must learn that bad and unlawful behaviour will not be tolerated.
“No staff member should go to work and feel unsafe. My thoughts go out to victims and their families who have been affected by this assault.”
Unions have targeted the office of ACT Party leader David Seymour in Auckland as they fight against government plans to repeal Fair Pay Agreements (FPAs).
Last week, a leaked Cabinet paper revealed Minister of Workplace Relations and Safety Brooke Van Velden intended to push forward repealing the agreements without holding any consultation with unions or affected workers.
A hundred and fifty protesters chanted impassioned pleas across the intersection outside Seymour’s Epsom electorate office near Westfield Newmarket.
FPAs were a return to 1970 style national awards. They were a payoff for Labour’s union funders and one could have ended up with just 1% of an industry forcing the other 99% into a national award where a small Invercargill employer would have to pay the same wages as a huge multinational in Auckland, if their jobs were similiar.
Great to see the Government doing what they promised, and repealing them quickly.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says big cheques will have to be written to pay out the many contracts canned as a result of repealing Three Waters. …
Luxon admitted there were employees under the scheme who were only one year into five-year contracts who would have to be paid out.
Whoever approved five year contracts should be named. It was well known that the centralisation model imposed by the Government would be reversed by a new Government.
Paul Reynolds, the former chairman of Waka Kotahi the NZ Transport Agency, has resigned from the board.
Reynolds had been on the board only since February.
Cassandra Cowley has been appointed acting chairwoman.
Patrick Reynolds, also appointed to the board by the former Labour Government, has also resigned. Both names have gone from the Waka Kotahi website.
NZTA badly needs a change of direction,. It needs directors who see their job as being how to help people travel to their destinations using their preferred travel mode.
I studied medicine in Otago, and while I was there, I joined the Territorials, and all up, I served nearly 22 years in the regular force and Territorials. During that time, I was deployed three times in a very intense period over two years. I did two winter tours of Afghanistan, and a stint in East Timor in 2006 in between. My son was six months old when I first deployed; I missed his first Christmas, and he turned three while I was away on my last tour. My already shaky first marriage didn’t survive. I lost friends and colleagues in Afghanistan, and so the withdrawal from there and the state of that country and the fate of women there break my heart.
It is hard to imagine being deployed overseas while you have a six months old son. We owe so much to those who serve in the military.
Worth noting that an additional Assistant Speaker, was elected in this Parliament, being Teanau Tuiono of the Greens.
Off memory this is the first time a presiding officer has come from a party that isn’t National or Labour.
Usually the main party of Government provides the Speaker, Deputy Speaker and one Assistant Speaker, and the main party of Opposition one Assistant Speaker. I’m pleased to see Parliament agree to another party providing one of the presiding officers.
Murmurings usually develop mid-political cycle with intentions signalled a year out, but in this mayoral cycle speculation has started much earlier.
Two respected strong right-leaning women will be an interesting race to watch – the seasoned Wellington politician versus the highly respected deputy mayor of Auckland.
Either Paula or Desley would be a great Mayor of Auckland. It would be a great choice, if they both stood.
However as it is FPP, and no doubt Labour will put up someone who wants to hike rates by 20%, it is important there is only one centre-right candidate.
I’m quite fascinated by this comment. It is such a Marxist thing to do is to declare someone a class traitor. I’m somewhat surprising that Clark didn’t also call James a race traitor.
But as I said this tells us so much about Clark. He is quoted extensively in the media as an expert on extremism, yet he is so extreme himself that he declares Meager to be a class traitor purely because he was born into a poor family and decided to become a National Party MP. Doesn’t that tell you so much about his inability to be rational.
Now Clark has every right to declare James to be a class traitor. Please keep it up. But the ones who should take note are the media who repeatedly quote him and interview him as some sort of impartial expert on extremism, when he has made it clear that he regards anyone not on the left of politics as repugnant.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has said he won’t re-appoint Chief Human Rights Commissioner Paul Hunt.
Goldsmith told Heather du Plessis-Allan that he wants to see a Human Rights Commissioner “who’s really focused on fundamental human rights such as free speech, freedom of expression and equal voting.
A Human Rights Commissioner who actually advocates for freedom of expression and equality of suffrage – that would be a wonderful thing.
Economic Development, Science and Innovation 4 Govt/4 Opp
Education and Workforce 5/4
Environment 5/4
Finance and Expenditure 6/5
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade 4/3
Governance and Administration 4/3
Health 5/4
Justice 6/5
Māori Affairs 4/4
Petitions 2/2
Primary Production 4/3
Regulations Review 3/2
Social Services and Community 5/4
Transport and Infrastructure 4/3
So the Government has a majority on all bar Economic Development and Maori Affairs. Of course National has a majority on none of them, so select committees hopefully will be more independent of the Government than previously.
