Kia ora and good afternoon, everyone. Today I’m joined by Finance Minister Nicola Willis to outline the steps that the Government is taking in response to the Commerce Commission’s report on competition in the banking sector. You will recall that the Commission reported in August that the banking sector was uncompetitive and New Zealanders were not well served by a highly profitable, two-tier oligopoly.
In particular, the Commission called attention to a lack of obvious or aggressive price competition. Commission Chair John Small said that in a well-functioning market with strong competition, we’d expect to see aggressive strategies to win customers from other banks. What the Commission found instead was little strategic differentiation, and growth targets that focused on maintaining market share and protecting margins and profitability. This means there is limited investment in innovation, muted competition between the banks, and poor service for some demographic groups, and frankly, that is not good enough. The Government shares the Commission’s concerns. We want to see vigorous competition between the banks on prices and services.
The Commission made 14 recommendations to improve competition in the banking sector, and they fall into four broad categories: one, better capitalising Kiwibank to enable it to be a disruptive competitor to the big banks; two, accelerating the development of open banking; three, removing regulatory barriers to entering the market; and four, expanding and putting more power in the hands of bank customers. And we intend to implement all 14 recommendations.
In short, we want to disrupt the status quo, and today I can confirm that Cabinet has agreed that it is important that Kiwibank is able to access more capital so it can compete more vigorously for business and home loan customers. We know Kiwis want to support a local bank but they will not—nor should they—sacrifice good interest rates or competitive returns. New Zealand savers and homeowners need real choice and we need to level this playing field.
We intend to pursue a capital injection into Kiwibank. Final decisions will be made next year. However, current expectations are that up to $500 million will be needed, and Nicola will shortly run through how we will progress that work.
We are determined to do everything we can to get this economy pumping, and that means building on the gains that we have already made on bringing down the cost of living and seeing lower inflation and lower interest rates. We’re not going to grow this economy by doing business the way this country has always done business. We are not going to lift standards of living, improve educational and health outcomes, and restore law and order by resisting change. This is our opportunity to power up Kiwibank to take on the Aussies and we are up for it. More competition means a better deal for Kiwis, so if you have a mortgage you get to keep more of your own money to support you with the cost of living, to invest in your community and to save for your retirement. I want to see banks fighting tooth and nail for Kiwi customers and this is the first step in achieving that vision. I will now hand over to Nicola, who will outline our plans for the banking sector. Nicola.
Thank you, Prime Minister. As you said, we want to see more competition between banks, increased investment in innovation, and better service, particularly for some of the businesses and people who are poorly served by the status quo. As the Prime Minister said, the Government is accelerating moves to provide Kiwibank with access to more capital. Kiwibank’s parent company, Kiwi Group Capital, and the Treasury have been directed to talk to New Zealand KiwiSaver funds, New Zealand investment institutions, and New Zealand professional investor groups about a potential investment of up to $500 million in Kiwibank.
Better capitalising Kiwibank will enable it to compete more vigorously against the big four Australian-owned banks. New Zealand is often seen as the little brother against the Aussies. We want to give that little brother a little bit more muscle to get a fairer deal for Kiwis. Advice to the Government is that an additional $500 million of capital could support up to $4 billion of business lending or $10 billion of home lending. That is sufficient to add competitive pressure to the market and potentially benefit customers of other banks as well as Kiwibank. I expect Kiwibank’s parent company and the Treasury to report back to me on options by about the middle of next year, at which point Cabinet will make a final decision on whether to proceed with a capital raise.
It’s important to note the Government is not considering selling any of the shares it currently holds. In the longer term, a future Government may consider the possibility of a public share offering, but no decision on an IPO—initial public offering—will be made during this term of Government. I’ve been advised that Kiwibank would not be in a position to consider the possibility of a public offering until it has completed its current digital transformation project, which is not scheduled for completion until 2028. The Government understands, of course, that before making any investment, any institutional investor will likely want an exit option, so if a public offering is not approved at a later date, I’m advised this exit option could take the form of investors having the option to sell their shares back to the Crown at an independently assessed fair value.
Today I am also announcing that I have issued a revised financial policy remit to the Reserve Bank, along with a letter of expectations emphasising the importance the Government places on competition in the banking sector. The new letter of expectations to the Reserve Bank outlines our Government’s expectations that the Bank must prioritise steps recommended by the Commerce Commission, including expanding access to the exchange settlement system with decisions by March next year; reviewing risk weighting for a range of bank lending, including agricultural lending and lending to community housing providers and lending for Māori housing on freehold land; reviewing minimum capital thresholds for new entrants into the banking sector; reviewing restrictions on the use of the word “bank”; working with industry to make bank accounts more widely available; and dismantling barriers to lending for housing on Māori freehold land.
Finally, today we are putting the major banks on notice. We expect them to act on the Commerce Commission’s recommendations, including through improvements to the bank switching service and open banking reform. Our message to the banks is this: the time to act is now. If you drag your heels, the Government is leaving open the possibility of further action. Our Government is determined to get a better deal for New Zealand banking customers, and the steps we have announced today should drive that. Competition is king. Prime Minister, back to you.
Thank you, Nicola. Look, before we get to any questions, I just do want to spend some time acknowledging that five years ago today, an eruption at Whakaari, White Island, claimed the lives of 22 people and it irrevocably changed the lives of so many more. Like everyone in the country, I remember the shock I felt when I learned about the eruption, and the dread and the disbelief that grew as the tragedy unfolded. Forty-seven people were on the island that day and they came from all over the world—Australia, the US, Germany, the UK, China and Malaysia, and of course from New Zealand. Many of the survivors and their families were far from home and all of them showed grace and courage in a situation few of us can imagine. Today we remember those who passed away, those who were injured, their whānau and everyone affected by this tragic event.
Moving to the House, the next few weeks are incredibly busy, with a very big legislative agenda to get through Parliament. This week we will be progressing a raft of legislation under urgency to advance the Government’s quarter four plan.
Included in the urgency motion will be the committee stage of the Fast-track Approvals Bill, the remaining stages of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill, the Sentencing (Reinstating Three Strikes) Amendment Bill and the Therapeutic Products Act Repeal Bill. We’ll also have the first readings of several bills, including changes to the Racing Act to boost racing industry sustainability. This is a busy Government and the House will sit for as long as it takes to pass the legislation, and ultimately how long we’re here for will depend on the Opposition. And with that, Nicola and I are happy to take your questions.
Prime Minister, the Finance Minister mentioned you were only opening this up for Kiwi-based funds and Kiwi-based firms. Is there a specific reason why it’s only New Zealand-based firms here, and do you have any expectation that any sort of overseas capital might be used to prop up Kiwibank?
Look, in the first instance we’ve been advised there’s sufficient interest in New Zealand for this capital raise. We do want to retain Kiwibank’s intrinsic New Zealand identity. That is part of its offering and it is something that we seek to preserve.
In terms of the IPO, even if it was well capitalised as an IPO, do you think it can ever get to the point where it is up against the major Aussie banks as a competitive option?
I think it can be a real disruptor. I think it can have the weight to nibble away at the heels of the big banks, who right now are complacent. And what the Australian experience has shown, with the entry of Macquarie Bank into retail banking, is that when a new player comes along with some might behind it, it can change the behaviour of the major trading banks. That has a significant impact. Even a reduction in interest rates of 0.25 could mean hundreds of millions more dollars flowing in the New Zealand economy. These are big stakes. This worth doing.
You mentioned briefly when you were talking about putting the major banks on notice your message is to act now or there will be further action. Can you just elaborate on what you mean by further action?
Well, look, there’s a number of recommendations in the Commerce Commission’s report. The Government is taking action on those areas where we can: in terms of the Reserve Bank, in terms of Kiwibank, in terms of open banking. But I simply note a number of the recommendations call on industry to step up. We are watching. The Commerce Commission is watching. If they don’t step up, we have a range of regulatory, legislative and policy tools at our disposal and we’re prepared to use them.
Have you received any advice from Treasury to the effect that by restricting this to New Zealand KiwiSavers and firms, and by restricting the investors’ ability to on-sell to anyone who’s potentially not yourself, you’re not getting the best price that you might be able to get, and for that reason you’re not getting the full effects of the competitive injection that you’re looking for?
The advice we’ve received is that the best option for capital raising in the medium term is through a broad public offering and that that would realise the best price and the best terms of investment in Kiwibank. However, as I’ve set out, that option isn’t on the table right now because the advice we’ve received is that until the transformation that Kiwibank is undertaking in terms of its digital assets is complete, they would not be best placed for a public offering. However, at this juncture there is an opportunity for New Zealand institutional investors to get in early, and that’s the option we’re exploring.
Given that’s the best solution that is possible long-term, how likely is it that you would potentially take that policy to the next election, putting it to both of you?
Can I just get a follow-up on the further action point? Can you just be a little bit more specific? What is the stick that you’re threatening banks with if they don’t comply?
The banks are being asked to do some pretty simple things. Make sure that they get open banking up and running. Get the bank switching service easier to use. Make sure that people can compare their home loan rates more easily. I don’t think that’s too much to ask. But if they don’t act, of course we can regulate. They often say to me, the major trading banks, that regulation gets in the way of them delivering good services. Well, I’m saying to them: get on and deliver better services so we don’t have to regulate.
It’s this simple, Jason. It’s this simple. The banks need to get on and deliver better, more affordable services to New Zealand customers. The Government is watching to see that they do, and if they don’t, we have a range of tools at our disposal. We’re completely prepared to use them.
I think when you think about a $500 million injection into Kiwibank that leads to, you know, I think it was something like $10 billion more of, you know, home lending and $4 billion, I think, of business lending if I remember correctly, yeah, that’s a huge magnifier effect. You know, that’s a really good thing. I’ll put it to you, you know, we’ve had three interest rate cuts in this country in the last 12 months and for the average punter, you know, the average person in New Zealand with a mortgage, that means that they’ve probably saved, you know, like $180 per fortnight. So anything that drives more competition, that puts more competition into the business lending or the home lending market, is actually a really good thing because the magnifier effect of that is huge.
Yeah, but I think your question is unfair because it suggests that we’re presenting Kiwibank as the silver bullet. We’re not. We need a range of approaches here. We accept that there are a range of things we need to do to drive banking competition. That’s why I’ve issued the new financial policy remit, because we accept that current prudential regulation creates a moat for new entrants trying to enter the banking sector. That’s why we’re also looking at open banking to provide new opportunities for fintechs and others to take part. That’s why we’re also leaning on the banks themselves to be more transparent in their competition-setting. So Kiwibank is one thing we can do.
And we do accept the advice of the Commerce Commission, who spent extensive months and time talking to those who understand the sector about what it would take to disrupt what had become a cosy pillow fight. And their advice is that this would make a difference. There are no silver bullets but it’ll make a difference.
The Commerce Commission also said it wasn’t necessarily the case that having another entrant or that Kiwibank would increase competition. You mentioned Macquarie before but Macquarie is a huge international bank. It’s known as the ‘vampire kangaroo’ in the UK. You’re not really comparing like for like there, are you?
Look, there’s a range of measures that we need to take and Cabinet has formed the view that giving Kiwibank more capital gives it a better chance of succeeding. I’d put to you that Kiwibank also has this advantage: New Zealanders like the idea that the returns from their banking will be invested back here in New Zealand. No other major trading bank can offer that today because the reality is when they profit off New Zealand customers, that goes to the bottom line of Australia. Kiwibank is distinct in that it genuinely benefits New Zealand.
Every single bank that has appeared before the select committee has pushed back on the notion that Kiwibank is some sort of maverick. Are you worried? I mean you obviously don’t care if they like it or not, but they obviously are in a position where they think that Kiwibank is not this young, scrappy upcomer that you are describing them as.
The banks that are having the cosy pillow fight, have they or the Banking Association been given any heads-up about any of this stuff and has it put the fear of God in any of them?
Hey look, I first talked about this in August. We published our intent then. I’ve been consistent and clear. In fact, I was at a Business New Zealand function just two weeks ago, where I made clear that this Government’s focus on competition is real. We believe in markets functioning to the service of customers and New Zealanders. There were major banks in the room and I hope they were listening.
And the Commerce Commission, you know, 14 recommendations, Jo, have been out for some time. So I think, you know, they—we take those very seriously. We’ve said we’re going to implement every single one of them.
I just mean in terms of the steps that you’ve announced today. Are they steps that you think that the other big banks will fear, in terms of the implications or the effect/impact that they could have on Kiwibank?
They should have nothing to fear from competition. The Commerce Commission’s recommendations have been laid out in black and white for some months now, and we have consistently said they should be taken seriously and that we are taking them seriously.
To use a different word then, rather than saying fear of the competition, do you think that they would be concerned that this would have any impact on their business as it currently operates today?
Well, I’m sorry, but when we have a Commerce Commission with 14 recommendations and the Government’s backing those Commerce Commission recommendations, and we have an inquiry going through our select committee process, as you’re well aware of, at the moment, which will digest the findings of all of that, and we are a Government that wants to see a lot more competition across a range of sectors across New Zealand as part of our economic growth plan because we’re all about growth, it’s pretty clear to us as to, you know, what our position is. As to how they feel about that, that’s up to them. But we’re in the business of making sure we get the settings right.
I don’t doubt any of that and I totally understand it, but isn’t the point whether the banks that you’re trying to screw down a bit are actually going to react or feel impacted in any way by what you have announced today? Do you know the answer to that?
The advice that we’ve had is that this range of measures will help support more competition in the banking sector. My focus is on: does this result in a better range of products for New Zealand bank users at fairer prices? And the advice we’ve received is that these measures will.
Minister Willis, to be clear, does that mean that you specifically, you are saying to New Zealanders today that you want them, if they’re with an Australian bank, to therefore look to potentially moving their home loan etc. to Kiwibank?
I no longer bank with ANZ. Sorry, I just want to correct that. I’m in the process of switching bank. But I actually don’t think it’s appropriate for my personal banking choices to in any way impact the choices of other New Zealanders, and I wouldn’t want to endorse any bank because what I think is really important—and I always say this when I’m talking about the official cash rate or other things—is that circumstances vary. What’s best for your family or your business will vary considerably from different regions, from different sectors, and people are best placed to make those assessments for themselves, and it would be wholly inappropriate for me as Finance Minister to direct those choices.
We don’t talk about what happens in Cabinet. As we’ve talked about with respect to ferries, we’ll have more to say about it shortly before the end of the year.
Again, we don’t talk about what happens in Cabinet. You’ll just have to wait and see. We said we’d come back to you and talk about what the plan is around ferries. We’ll do that before the end of the year.
So again, Jenna, I’ll just say to you the same answer I just gave for the last two questions, which is that we actually don’t talk about what happens in Cabinet. We said we’ve committed to saying more about the ferries before the end of the year, and we’ll do so. So watch this space.
Again, last question on the same subject with the same answer, which is that we will talk about ferries before the end of the year, as we’ve committed to doing. Righto. Thank you, Jenna. We’ll move on. Mark.
Yeah, it’s sitting with Minister Jones at the moment, and also with Minister Brown and Minister Bishop at some level as well. They’re working through the final pieces of that. But, you know, the bottom line for us is that, you know, as you’ve seen with energy security challenges that have impacted manufacturing businesses across New Zealand, we need to stop using Indonesian coal, we need to start producing domestic gas, and we’re going to continue to do that.
Prime Minister, back on banking, in terms of the capital for Kiwibank, could you put that in some sort of context, I guess, supporting $5 billion of lending?
The banks combined have about $600 billion of lending, I think. In that context, is enabling another $5 billion for Kiwibank going to make much difference?
Look, Kiwibank currently has around $37 billion worth of total assets, around 8 percent of home lending. It has consistently for the past five years had the fastest-growing market share. And so is there the capacity for them to find more customers and lend more? Yes. The advice we have received is that without additional capital, their ability to pursue that growth will be limited.
No, absolutely not. These are some of our toughest, most serious, persistent young offenders, and as we’ve said right from the beginning, it won’t be perfect but actually what’s important is we do everything we can to make a very strong, powerful intervention in these young people’s lives. As to whether they ultimately choose to take on board the opportunity to change the direction of where their lives are going, that—like everything for all human beings— is a choice they get to make. But we are going to do everything we can to make as powerful an intervention as we can in those young people’s life, and to show them a different way and to give them a better choice.
Well, I’ll just say to you is that, you know, partly why we’ve had a pilot that’s actually been able to run a residential programme under law for three months—with us being able to run a longer residential programme, I think that would be good, but we’ll look at that next year as legislation comes through. But what I’d just say to you is: look, these are without doubt our toughest, most serious, persistent young offenders. It’s important that we actually make an intervention in order to keep the public safe. We’ve got some young people in this programme that have really made good choices and we hope that they continue to do so. But I’m sorry, the alternative or the counterfactual of doing nothing, which is what the last Government did, is not on the cards here.
I am proud of the fact that we are starting to see crime come down. Total victimisations is down 3 percent. You’ve seen ram crime rates, which we used to talk about with you, Benedict, every single day, now down 60 percent, and we’ve got a 30 percent increase in police out and across the beat. That’s a good sign. We’ve got a lot more to do, but we’ve just passed a whole heap of laws that we hope to have more effect as we go forward.
Is the Minister for Children too close to these offenders? I mean, last week when they absconded, she said, “Oh, they’ve just gone through—” you know, “They’ve lost a friend”, you know, “They’re upset”, and yet they’ve gone out, armed themselves and gone out on a crime spree.
No, that’s not what’s happening here. We need to make sure that we keep the public safe from what are some of our serious, toughest young offenders, as I’ve said before. We are doing everything we can. Some of those young people will choose to make changes to their life and where it’s going and the trajectory of where it’s heading to. Others will not do that, and that is ultimately a choice up to them. But I am going to do everything we can to make sure we keep the public safe, first and foremost, from these young offenders, and in the process we’re try and do everything we can to rehabilitate them or to give them smarter choices, better mentoring and better coaching around what the options are for them going forward in their lives.
Has Oranga Tamariki offered any explanation as to how the young person went missing from a funeral, when he had two Oranga Tamariki staff there to watch him to make sure he didn’t abscond from the funeral?
Prime Minister, what did you make of Oranga Tamariki failing to even tell the Minister that there had been a second absconding incident? Obviously the Minister was pretty critical. What did you make of it?
Yeah, I didn’t think it was very flash. But again, it doesn’t diminish from what we’re trying to achieve here, which is that these are young people left to the courses—the trajectory of where their lives are going to. I want to be able to do everything I can to make changes and to give them opportunities to make a better choice and a smarter choice about how they may live their lives from this point onwards. Again, I’m going to do everything I can to do that, and I’m going to try to do something different because that’s the way we keep the public safer, ultimately, and it’s ultimately the way we actually get these young people’s lives turned around.
Will you be receiving or are you seeking any more regular updates as to how it’s going, now that it’s entered the community phase and now that we’ve had these incidents?
Yeah, I’ve had fairly good updates. As I said, I’ve been and visited the facility myself. I spent a lot of time there, actually, with these 10 young people in particular. I observed outstanding leadership and mentorship being offered to them and opportunities being offered to them, a lot of resource, a lot of effort, a lot of often love and advice and counsel that they just haven’t received from their own families, and Oranga Tamariki and the people involved in the programme doing an excellent job with it. So, you know, we’re going to continue with it. We obviously need to—we’re now in the community phase, where the residential phase has ended, and as part of our pilot we need to look at that when we finish that community phase.
Acknowledging it’s a different phase, have you sought any assurances or any kind of clarification on how the in-community phase works, given that we’ve had two absconding incidents pretty recently after they’ve entered the community?
Yeah I’ve got a good sense of the fact and the support that we’ve got around those young people, but there are some good questions to ask and I think we should put them to the Minister and also to OT.
I think when we designed the programme and when we talked about this phase, knowing this would be the challenging part of it, to see that we’ve got young people who are choosing to actually—some have engaged with jobs, some have engaged with education.
That’s a fantastic thing. And I know it’s a lot of effort, I know it’s a big intervention, I know it’s a lot of resources going into it, but what’s the alternative? The alternative is to have these young people out in the community running amok. The alternative is actually that they carry on with lives actually that lead them down a pathway of more serious violent crime and that doesn’t mean the community is safe. So we are going to keep the community safe and make sure, at the same time, we also do everything we can to get these young people to see that there are smarter choices that they can and should be making.
You just mentioned the potential for a longer residential phase period. Is that something that was already being considered or are you now considering that, following—
No, it’s just an option. I mean we need to go through the full pilot evaluation and at the moment the pilot was set up under existing laws, as I understand it. We’re limited to three months in residential care, nine months in community care. That’s one of the questions we could legitimately ask for, as we think about the legislation that will start going through the House.
I’m not saying we will do that, I’m just saying there will be more optionality as we think about the balance between residential versus community care, you know, and that’s something that legitimately—
I don’t know. I mean, I’m not—we haven’t had those conversations because we want to go through this pilot. But what I’m just saying to you is we’ve got a chance to put a pilot in place, which we’re doing. It’s great to see some of these young people responding incredibly positively. Yes, we’ve had young people choose not to go down that pathway and to go with the options that they’ve been presented. That’s their choice, their decision, but the consequences then become very real very quickly and they limit where their—the trajectory of where those lives are—their lives are going. But that’s up to them to make that choice. But we’re going to try and present a better choice to young people, and we’ll continue to do that. As to how we go through the pilot and as to the mix between residential versus community care and other things that we learn along the way, that’s the point of the pilot.
But we’re talking about putting kids in a controlled environment, so how long do you think is too long for those teenagers to spend locked up like that?
I don’t have a view on that. We’ve got a pilot which we’ve committed to. We want to make sure we understand what has worked well, what we could improve, and that will inform our thinking as we develop a programme next year.
Well, look, Syria under the Assad regime was not a good government. It treated people poorly. It had massive amounts of human abuses, as you well know. Now we have HTS coming in. We hope there’s a peaceful transition into that for the sake of the people in the region, but again, you know, it’s a pretty difficult and challenged part of the world and we really want to see a de-escalation in that part of the world.
We have about one New Zealander that we’re aware of on safe travel. We’re maybe aware of another one. Maybe just, you know, we’re talking about two New Zealanders maybe in Syria at this point in time. But that’s the reason we’ve had, for a very long period of time, a ‘do not travel to Syria’ sort of designation in place.
Look, I mean, it’s a—it’s really challenged part of the world and the reality is what we want to see is as peaceful a transition as is possible, with some bad choices in there and— but importantly for the people of Syria, who have been through huge, catastrophic suffering. And that’s what we need to see in that part of the world. So, you know, it’s still—it’s still live, it’s still new, it’s still—we’re monitoring it. But, you know, ultimately, you know, the last part of this region needs is more chaos.
Within the last hour we’ve seen a Curia poll out showing that the National Party has fallen about 4.5 percentage points, ACT are up 4.5 percentage points. Given the events— since this poll was taken within the last month, obviously people’s minds will be on the hīkoi. Do you still think that you’re on the right side of this? You say you’re going to support it in the first reading but then absolutely nothing to do with it after the second reading.
Well look, I appreciate there’ll be a range of polls floating around on any given day, but the reality is that those are numbers that are vastly different from what I understand them to be. But that aside—I’m not here to talk about the polls—our position on the Treaty Principles Bill, as we’ve said, has been very clear. And I think, you know, what New Zealanders really want us to do is to focus on the work that we’re doing, which is rebuilding the economy, restoring law and order, delivering better public services. And I think when they look at the fact that we have lowered inflation, we’re lowering interest rates, we’ve lowered tax relief, given people tax relief. they see crime and victimisations down 3 percent, they see the big focus in investment going into education and also in health, they can see that we are doing exactly what we said we would do. And so, look, I appreciate there’ll be a range of polls with a range of numbers, but what’s important is that we’re focusing on things that matter most to Kiwis and getting the job done.
Again, Jenna, I know it’s so frustrating but you just will have to wait until the end of the year. We said we’d come back to you before the end of the year.
Jenna, we don’t talk about Cabinet conversations—this is going to get to be a very repetitive answer—and we will talk to you as soon as we have something to say. We’ve said that we would commit to you, coming back to you before the end of the year. We will do that. I promise you we will do that. You’ll see that we’ll develop a great solution for the Cook Strait, but we’ll have more to say about that shortly.
The previous five questions, you’ve asked the same question. I’ve given you the same answer, which is that Cabinet—we don’t talk about it, and we’ll have more to say about it shortly.
—and saying that getting it done in the two years was quite difficult and that it was more likely to be mid-2026. Do you see that as a broken promise, given the recent commitments by you to make that original target?
Well, what I’d just say to you is: isn’t it great we’ve got a Government with some ambition that actually wants to recruit 500 more police officers? Isn’t it fantastic?
No, no, but listen, but isn’t it fantastic we’ve had twice the number of applications that we had a year ago? Isn’t it great that actually attrition rates amongst the police are much lower than we thought they would be, and more aligned with what they’ve been for the last 10 years?
Yeah, well, I’d just say to you what we—it’s going to be—it’s going to be tight, it’s going to be ambitious, I get that, but what’s important here is we are step-changing the commitment of extra police officers coming into the Police. And what I see is low levels of attrition. What I see is a doubling of people applying to join the Police. What I see is the recruitment wing is moving at the beginning of next year from 70 up to 100. All of that is positive, right, compared to the conversation that you were having with me six months ago about this, and about this goal and this piece of work that we’ve put in place. So I think those are good things, that we’re actually seeing some more momentum towards recruitment. We know that it’s tough, we know it’s a big goal, but we’re going to do everything we can. We are an ambitious Government. We set big goals, we go for them, we put everything into it and we work day and night to make it happen.
We’re just wondering because back at the start the Police did indicate that it would be very hard to do in the two years, Mark Mitchell said three, and then Winston Peters came in and said, “No, it has to be two”. And now you’re saying Winston is pretty relaxed about whether or not it’s two or more.
No, I didn’t say that. I was asked whether Winston had commented on the conversation from what the Police Commissioner said last week, and I haven’t had those conversations with him. We haven’t talked about it.
It’s about 4.6 percent at the moment, consistent with what it’s been for the last decade. So, you know, there’s been a lot of conversation about police officers leaving to go to
Australia but when you look at our Police attrition rate I think it’s 4.6, 4.7 percent, something like that, completely consistent with what it’s been for the last decade. But importantly, I think because people feel there’s a Government now that’s backing the Police, when you see a doubling of applications that’s a good sign. And when you see us announce—as we did, you know, I think a month ago—that we’re going to increase the recruitment wing from 70 to 100, that’s all part of our effort to do everything we can to actually get more police officers into the system.
We are doing everything we can, Jenna, to do exactly that, and we’re going to work incredibly hard to do it. And I think what’s important is: isn’t it fantastic that there’s progress being made towards that goal and there’s momentum towards that?
But if these promises and these goals mean nothing to you, why should New Zealanders believe you the next time that you stand up here and say, “This is our goal”, if goals mean nothing to you?
—because now as a result we have much better recruitment efforts. We’ve doubled the amount of recruitment. Now, as a result of setting a goal, we actually are able to take on larger recruitment wings in graduate—in police training courses. Now, as a result, we’re able to actually lower crime. Those are all good things. So goals matter because they’re actually setting some ambition and aspiration for the public service, for the agencies, for our Government to stay incredibly focused.
And I think when you see the work that we’ve committed to—lower the cost of living with inflation relief, interest rate relief, tax relief—those have been good things. When you see the progress we’ve made on crime—we used to discuss ram raids every single time I’d run into you folk. Now we don’t anymore because it’s down 60 percent. You know, cops on the beat is up 30 percent across New Zealand. That’s a fantastic thing. And we start to see victimisations, for the first time in a long time, starting to come down at minus 3 percent.
So I appreciate a lot more to do but that’s the way we roll, which is we set ourselves some big goals. We go for it. We put everything we can into it. And the big thing is that we get a different result from just sitting there doing nothing and carrying on with the way things were, where crime got worse each and every single day in this country.
We won’t be doing that. We’ve got fantastic recruits that have been joining us. The process is to make sure we’ve got good people wanting to join the Police, and the process of coming into the Police is difficult and it should remain so. We want to have a good-quality police force. That is non-negotiable.
But what is important is you have to understand when you set a goal—and, you know, if you talked to me three months ago or six months ago or twelve months ago, when you talked about attrition rates, when you talked about recruitment rates, they were in very different places from where they sit today. That’s a good thing. And so we’re moving towards that goal. Yes, it’s tough. Yes, it’s going to be hard. But man, we’re going to try. We’re going to do everything we can, and that’s what the New Zealand people expect us to do. They don’t want more of the same old Government just boiling the ocean and lots of bumper stickers and slogans. They want us to try and to get things done for them, and that’s what this Government’s doing.
For two reasons. One, the purpose of the lock-up is ultimately for the media to get advance notice of really important financial information so they can process it, digest it and communicate it clearly to New Zealanders. Craig Rennie is not a member of the media. We have traditionally also invited financial institutions who have market-sensitive audiences who also require time to digest that information. Neither is he part of that. I have been advised that both Craig Rennie and the Taxpayers’ Union will no longer be attending the lock-up. I’d also just say last time Craig Rennie went to a lock-up, he made up a false quote and attributed it to me, and I don’t believe that that is practice consistent with the privilege of attending a lock-up.
Great. Well, thank you very much for your questions. Jenna, we’ll get you an answer on ferries very shortly, so watch this space, and we look forward to seeing you through the course of the week. Take care. Thank you, everyone.