Open Mike 20/08/25
Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, August 20th, 2025 - 85 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
CommentsOpinions
Today's Posts (updated through the day):
Nicola Willis: National gave “tens of dollars” to Kiwis
New Post up:
Nicola Willis: National gave “tens of dollars” to Kiwis
The government’s plan to move New Zealand’s entire vehicle fleet to road-user charges has yet to be implemented and there is already talk of widening its scope.
https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/08/19/road-user-charges-could-fund-a-safer-cleaner-nz-and-be-a-world-first/
Bishop said it would be similar to paying a power bill
https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/08/07/what-we-know-about-new-road-user-charges-and-end-of-petrol-tax/
Yet, back in 2023 MBIE estimated 110,000 households can’t afford to keep their homes adequately warm – that’s about 300,000 people. We've even had businesses fall due to the high cost of power
https://www.mbie.govt.nz/about/news/new-analysis-shows-110000-households-unable-to-afford-to-heat-their-homes
Key opened the sector to further privatisation and prices soared. National are now talking about privatising road-user charges. Which one assumes will further drive up costs as profit is sought and expected to grow
Many are finding the cost of living very hard at the moment. Thus, I think it would be fair to assume there will be a good number that will struggle to pay these new road-user charges. Therefore, there needs to be exemptions for some, a form of progressive charging or both. And no to privatisation.
It's a Hard Hell No on all vehicles GPS tracked, from me,
It is said data is the new oil. So one assumes it won't just be tracking data they will be collecting.
Do you know of any political party opposing this?
Not sure, it's it's still in the policy writing stage isn't it, ?
But using it as a behavior modification tool is a step to far, and I class myself as border line authoritarian.
Some details are still being finalized but Bishop expects the legislation to pass in 2026, with the system becoming operational by 2027.
People I've spoken with are very concerned about the cost and related privacy issues.
You (and others) may be interested in these links below.
This is a look at what's happening over the ditch.
And here is a look at how bad things have got in the UK
No party will oppose this as the goal is to get people using public transport and get private vehicles off the roads.
[lprent: Corrected your handle. Could you fix it on your next comment so that the error doesn’t repeat. ]
Are you sure? Perhaps you'd like to provide a link for that. Otherwise I'd have to regard your statement as just being complete bullshit.
In any case, the only place that particular argument has been used, pro public transport and getting private cars off the roads, has been in Auckland in the context of congestion charging. No other city in NZ currently has both significant congestion and public transport (ie not Tauranga with its traffic and inadequate public transport) that provides the need for congestion charging or forced pushes to public transport.
As far as I can see from the statements by Bishop and others, the main reason for the change to RUC is to limit the fall in tax revenue as vehicles become more efficient and using less hydrocarbons. The ostensible purpose is to provide for funding the road transport network. As was clear when it was announced
Of course that isn't exactly valid even on the face of it.
Auckland would also be the place that most of the extra revenue would come from, as that is the province in NZ that also has the largest numbers of vehicles that would wind up with increased taxes on private vehicles. It is also the area of the country that does the most kilometres and therefore RUC revenue.
Yet it is also the place that has probably the lowest intended level of transport investment in terms of roading in the most congested areas. Yet, as far as I can see, none of the raised revenue from RUC charges will be put into congestion relieving measures. No plans to increase our public transport beyond what has already been planned and fought for by the council and AT over decades.
In the Auckland isthmus, the most traffic congested area in NZ, there is a single proposed motorway in Onehunga planned. That will mostly benefit trucks, and has a truly awful cost/benefit ratio. Plans for a new and very required harbour crossing are as usual receding into the future. From all accounts about current plans, like the current harbour crossing, it will lack any significiant provision for dedicated public transport like rail lines or busways.
It is pretty much the same everywhere else. The RUC changes look like they are purely for revenue gathering purposes – not..
Basically your statement is just complete misinformation and a steaming turd of bullshit.
The reason I say this is because every party seems to have the goal of getting people out of private cars and onto public where available.
The Labour Party policy is for a "mode shift in urban areas from private vehicles to public transport, walking, and cycling will support efforts to reduce emissions." This included investments in public transport infrastructure to provide alternatives to private cars.
https://www.transport.govt.nz/area-of-interest/strategy-and-direction/government-policy-statement-on-land-transport-2021
Both the Greens and The Maori Party websites advocate for a move away from private car dependency.
The National Party have currently committed billions to develop public transport.
Public transport is dangerous and vastly inadequate in many regions.
Further, many need to drive so this goal is going to face pushback.
But pushback with no political backing will be difficult.
Oh really? Link to that?
Do you not read the news?
This is merely one of many attacks
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350389211/teen-girls-attacked-auckland-bus-broad-daylight
Oh I read the news alright. Your statement was, and I quote…
You didnt say in what way you perceived Public Transport as dangerous. Also IMO disingenuous.
Do you not read the news?
Ponder this
Say you had a daughter working late shifts at the hospital. Would you prefer she took her car or caught a bus?
There have been female hospital staff attacked in unlit and unsecured hospital car parks. A well lit station with CCTV staffed coverage and a well lit train with internal safety features is very much preferred.
If they are being attacked in the car park don't you think they would also be attacked heading to and from the bus stop or station?
And hospital car parks (if they don't already) can also be well lit up with CCTV staffed coverage.
Hate for her to drive- too many psychos on the road.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350370714/there-was-blood-all-through-car-auckland-road-rage-incident-escalates-alleged
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/road-rage-killer-jailed-for-three-years/BOOB3NOLGMQYC54WAJCZEAJW4E/
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/558113/fatal-crash-closes-part-of-road-in-central-auckland-suburb-of-point-chevalier
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/569512/person-allegedly-threatened-with-weapon-during-road-rage-incident-in-massey-west-auckland
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360709480/woman-steps-defend-elderly-driver-road-rage-incident
https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/07/25/two-people-seriously-injured-in-auckland-road-rage-fight/
https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/11/18/auckland-man-arrested-after-armed-road-rage-incident-with-road-workers/
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/indonz/526386/chef-gagon-dhamijaa-s-fingers-slashed-in-alleged-south-auckland-road-rage-attack
https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/350012008/teenage-girl-shot-after-road-rage-incident-central-auckland
Imagine how unsafe y’all must be feeling in your cars! Wait until you hear about the road toll! And these new car charges coming in!
Most people aren't insurance actuaries and base their perceptions of risk on gut feeling rather than data. It only needs a few attacks carried out in buses or trains for potential customers to start feeling that traveling on them is unsafe.
Even a number of drivers were/are feeling unsafe. As a number of them have been attacked as well
“It's a terrible thing to live in fear“, but what a treat to travel for free – memories.
https://www.horizons.govt.nz/buses-transport/new-fare-structure
Of course vested interests will be pushing their interests.
But there is also people with no vested interest that (for numerous reasons) like to take their car rather than opt for public transport.
Of course they will, and it does no harm to point that out, does it.
It's mostly for convenience – "dangerous" is your red herring, imho.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring
By the way, that vested interest can't have had too much sway if they can't stop the government pricing people off the roads
Do you really believe that? OK – "No surprises there"
Oh, for a normal Minister of Health!
Do you not think these road-user charges (over the long term) will result in people being priced off the roads?
As for the teachers, they have my support
Don't know – time will tell. Either way, the CoC is govt by the sorted, for the sorted, and sorted do not care about RUCs, or teachers and nurses – unless they’re “playing politics“.
So people are getting priced off the road in a country with very poor public transportation and having their privacy invaded and location data sold to a private corporation to boot?
It’s a bit like how there’s less emergency housing if you just kick out all the tenants!
Solutions, from National and friends.
Larger tyres on your rims will affect your odometer reading by up to 10% ie 100 K's travelled 90 recorded, rort the buggers.
Wouldn't work on the GPS based RUC systems, as they don't record off the odometer.
As someone who used to work deep in the RUC space at Waka Kotahi, I actually welcome this move. But only if it’s done properly.
A well-designed road-user charging system is simply fairer. Right now, people who can afford newer, more fuel-efficient cars end up paying less in fuel tax, even though they often drive just as much, or more, than everyone else.
In effect, the current setup subsidises wealthier drivers while those with older cars carry a bigger share of the cost.
The technology itself isn’t the real issue here: strong regulatory controls are. All the government actually needs to know is how far you’ve travelled. Not where you’ve been, not who you were with, and not how fast you were going. That’s it. And honestly, most of us are already carrying mobile phones that are far easier to track (and compromise) than a vehicle will ever be, so as long as we have strict safeguards, the privacy risks can be managed.
Where I completely agree with the concerns, though, is around affordability. With cost-of-living pressures already high, we need a fair system with exemptions, progressive charging, or targeted relief for those who would otherwise struggle. Without that, it risks hitting lower-income households the hardest.
the government doesn't have access to cell phone tracking though (generally).
Last time National were in government, they tried to introduce big data capture of the population, starting with, you guessed it, poor people who can't easily push back politically. The amount of trust I have for them of being respectful of privacy rights is zero.
If there is a way for road users to have a digital meter on the vehicle that is say accessed when one gets a WOF, that seems doable. Anything that connects vehicles to the government digital infrastructure in real time, yeah, nah.
Mind you, I've not yet seen a good description of the tech. Is that using satellite? Would it be retrofitted?
I’m assuming it would be via a dash- or wheel-mounted unit and GPS-driven, similar to the existing EHubo units that have been around for a while now.
We already have the technology and infrastructure here in New Zealand. ERoad, are based out in Albany, are a major player in this space globally.
That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s tracking you via GPS, though. The device could just use GPS data to calculate distance travelled locally, without constantly transmitting your location to anyone. The distinction between positioning and tracking is really important here: good system design can enable one without automatically enabling the other.
Ultimately, the real questions are around how the data is collected, stored, and accessed. And whether the safeguards are strong enough to prevent scope creep later on.
how does GPS mileage tracking work without logging position?
there's a substantial difference between businesses choosing to use a private enterprise like eroad for various reasons, and every vehicle in NZ being forced to use GPS by the government.
we can choose to turn location services off on your phone, we're not forced to us it.
So I don't see the existing technology, I see people arguing that it's just like x, y, z, when it's really not from a privacy and civil liberties perspective.
Whereas I think the real question is 'can government be trusted with new technology that breaks the ceiling on existing privacy conventions?'
If we use your framing, we break the conventions in the name of expediency, and don't even recognise that we have done so.
More a question of if the government has anyone competent to envisage how you’d even implement a real-time system. I spent most of 12 years building software for the operation of and networked control of small electronic devices with GPS and radio functionality for yachts and battle simulations for military. I can’t imagine Chris Bishop or even the people at NZTA having the faintest idea of the difficulties of having hundreds of thousands of devices trying to stay alive long enough to report in.
Just to give an idea, of what happens with a simple existing and common installation, I live in a 61 residences apartment building with smart power meters in our garage reporting via cell to power companies. At any one time at least 10 of the 61 will not be reporting for one reason or another. I regularly help out residents with interesting power bills.
That is a benign environment compared to having similar devices running around in cars.
Having spent the last 4 months bashing my head against the brick wall of trying to build a telemetry platform for a few hundred devices, yeah. That's a thing.
And it won't just be thousands. The NZ vehicle fleet is well over 4 million vehicles.
I doubt that they'll even try to do it in real time – they might look at it and back off when they realise how hard it is. The investment in technology and time to get the design right, test it properly and keep it running will be too much They'll probably just require manual reporting of odometer readings when you get a WOF. That'll open up some forms of rorting no doubt. Plus there are other issues that would have to be solved, like handling change of ownership between WOF inspections, which would not be too hard to deal with if another odometer report was required at the time.
Anyway, the Nats never saw a regressive tax they didn't like. So they'll try to do it.
Probably. That has the advantage of being an existing backend system and I think that it is a fully online system already. That will make their revenue pretty laggy the first year of each vehicles operations.
Anyone want to bet on the vehicles having to use paper for the RUCs. Why? Because the police probably don't already have a way of accurately accessing information in the field for the current status of RUCs electronically and rapidly. Nor will the electronic eyes. Both currently rely on windscreen paper as far as I am aware.
It'd typically take several years (and probably closer to a decade based on past experience) getting those back-end electronic systems right. It took the power companies and banks a awfully long time.
Similarly with a website to allow users to electronically punch in odometer meter readings. Something as simple as paying parking and traffic fines took a while. Tolls usually happened pretty fast, but they had the construction period to prepare.
This is all going to be a frigging disaster because they're planning on getting probably 3+ million vehicles into a new system starting a rollout in 2027.
The CoCkups in this government have been noticeable for announcing without any planning. Think of the ferry debacle or their inability to anticipate a deepened recession after they heavily cut the numbers of employed (and the businesses that fed off them). That dropped their revenues like a stone….
One can only imagine what the it bill is going to be on this one then, $$$$$$$
Sure, the tech is been around for a while. Not really the issue. It becomes more of a question about what the need is from the perspective of the car owner.
From the governments perspective of course they'd like a reporting odometer because it means that they can bill more frequently. That requires reporting of an odometer. Every on-road vehicle is required to have a odometer. But if it was only read once a year in WOF or to rely on a owner to purchase they run out of kilometres – then the revenue will be lumpy.
Which isn't that healthy from a tax collection perspective, and kind of major cost issue for the government in enforcing it. I can imagine the police will get somewhat pissed at having to put their heads in next to the clutching arms of drivers at alcohol testing stops to check the odometer. It is pretty noticeable at how far away they stand away as they wave the device in front of the mouth of the citizen drivers as it is.
For vehicle owners to want to report odometer readings via a device, then there would have to be a substantial benefit.
Start with making such devices cheap. A blackbox tracker with GSM/LTE would set you back at least $150, and even more for a SIM and installation. Probably close to about $500 for purchase + installation. An annual cost of at least $200 for a eSim service to report – just having the service costs about that.
Security on cheaper devices? Don't even think about WiFi. Even with a eSim, I think that building a non-hackable device would be a big ask. Not to mention the accuracy issues with what could be done with a bit of tinfoil.
To even think about that with all of the aggravation, you'd want a significiant rebate on the RUC. Especially for someone like me who usually only drives 5-15k per year. It'd need a payback of of no more than a year or two. All at $79/1000 km…
Yeah. Nah!
What, you mean we can't trust the 10-year-old firmware on this unit I bought off Ali Express :p
If we assume we can handwave the technology and security concerns for as second, I still think everyone paying RUC is a much fairer system than giving rich people an implicit subsidy.
They do already it's called an odometer, I believe it is checked and kms driven are written down at wof time already.
who has a digital meter?
I was being literal every car has an odor in it's dash unless your driving something pretty old it'll be digital.
Likely an RFID system.
Due to the low cost of implementation of ISO 18000-6C RFID Systems, Taiwan has been able to populate close to 80% of its vehicles with passive transponders. As these transponders are based on an open standard, they can easily allow other applications such as Urban Traffic Monitoring to take advantage of the large installed base of transponders on vehicles.
[…]
After analyzing the needs of the 2 urban areas, several locations in Taoyuan and Kaohsiung were selected for the installation of SSI’s RFID Reader and Antenna equipment. Two of SSI’s flagship products were installed in each of these locations: Regor, an advanced high-performance mutli-port RFID reader and the Cheetah, an wide-angle RFID Antenna tuned specifically for road usage.
As a vehicle with an eTag passes under an antenna, it is detected allowing its data to be read and recorded by the Regor reader. At this stage, the vehicle’s class and unique ID are then collected and time-stamped.
When the same vehicle passes under another antenna in a different location, the information is collected again. A central system processes the data and using the time and distance differences of the readings the system calculates the average speed of the vehicle. The average speed of a vehicle, along with that of other vehicles driving the same route, provides the system with an overall indication for the road’s congestion level. Once this level of congestion is statistically calculated, it can immediately be sent to the electronic road signage to give drivers visual indications of actual traffic flows along their route of travel.
https://star-int.net/taiwan-traffic-monitoring-systems-utilize-star-rfid-readers-and-antennas/
Electric vehicles wouldn't have avoided the tax if it was progressively taken from incomes rather a regressive fuel tax. But agree the current setup/loophole re electric vehicles needs correcting.
Data can generate income. And data is what feeds AI. So one assumes there will be lobbying to enable that. You can imagine insurance companies would be keen as on gaining individual's driving habit data. So to would the police. And the private operator would be keen as to widen their revenue stream
Yeah it does. But, the cost of EVs – and especially newish ones with a decent battery life ahead of them – is so enormous that it's economically rational to not buy one and just keep running a relatively old ICE vehicle where most of the depreciation has already occurred. The fuel cost (including tax) you pay in doing so is a fraction of the upgrade cost to a newish EV. However, it does make environmental sense to upgrade to an EV. But when economic sense runs counter to environmental sense, we all know which option most people will take, because they are too poor to do anything else.
Given yr experience with NZTA and RUCs do you have an opinion on the amount trucks and heavy vehicles pay (RUC) in respect to the wear and tear they cause?
Everything I have read implies that motorists are subsidising the trucking industry.
The short answer is they pay nowhere near the actual costs of the damage they do to the roads and are effectively cross subsidized by the owners of lighter diesel vehicles and petrol vehicles.
If they had to pay the whole cost, every single logistics company would be forced out of business pretty much overnight.
Chur for that.
Less forced out of business, more we would pay the real cost of getting stuff from Auckland overnight, higher supermarket prices and more expensive dairy products.
The cookers and racists win ?….
Some background on Nat MP/conspiracist Ryan Hamilton as councillor (interestingly..from Hamilton)
I also link the following Hamilton City Council page in response to conspiracists. IMO very Reasonable, and well Reasoned…
Goodbye commonsense hello massive rates rises!
Yep. I really am dumbfounded, that the opponents of 3 Waters, beside the racist/cookery aspect, are furious about the Councils putting the rates up to pay for it ? Its some special kind of ignorance..
Felt like pointing that out to a whinging nzf voting work mate yesterday, but our relationship has always been delicately balanced, !!
Both of you think you are on the good side, however, as proven many times, only you are.
Onya mate : )
I'd argue as I don't repeat talk back radio sound bites only one of us thinks!
More like water meters everywhere, with users paying more accurately for what they use.
And that's not rates ? Beside the fact that the well heeled will continue to saturate their grass verge as ever, and the road..because they can. Sustainability of a precious resource is for others.
Oh and also, are you not counting the ongoing needed pipe works? Of the 3 Water variety?
It will be ratepayers…hello? Again those who can pay, will…however some will find it ever increasingly harder.
Those dumbarse racists who hated on a supposed co-governance? : morons.
The word "accurately" will I suspect prove over time to have been redundant.
Nicola Willis is claiming that more taxation on the haves is wrong because those who do not have are struggling with their living costs.
Labour need to close in on this tactic and mock this deception on social media.
(RNZ post 8 am – debate between her and the Opposition spokesperson, Barbara Edmonds).
Got one right, it was Carmel Sepuloni and Nicola Willis going head-to-head on Morning Report's weekly political panel.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/570480/national-and-labour-deputy-leaders-go-head-to-head-on-morning-report
Spot on, Nicola – increase tax on sorted Kiwis and the 'trickle down' might dry up?
The CoC is 'government' by the sorted, for the sorted, and the sorted do not care.
Imagine how many fancy ice creams $671,000,000 could buy "everyday Kiwis".
Full Lawson on genders in chess | ChessBase
Article around a male player recently winning a German girl's chess event (in line with German chess federation entry rules). This does present a plausible basis to believe in a small male natural advantage in chess, along with other sides to that discussion.
It's entirely plausible. There are all kinds of measurements for things like IQ or whatever in which the bell curve for males extends further at each end than the female one. We're less stable and less consistent across all kinds of measurable features. For the overwhelming majority of the population it makes no difference whatsoever, but out at the extreme ends of the curves it does make a difference involving small numbers of people, and chess is an elite competition.
Weird I woulda thought chess would be one sport where no division is necessary
Most competition chess occurs in a single open category. The womens events are basically just, pro level, international level or national championship competitions.
On a related note, I've been listening to a bit of Graham Linehan the last couple of days. His book Tough Crowd is a great listen, covers off the writing, creating and filming of Father Ted. A little bit on The IT Crowd then his unwittingly becoming one of the spearheads of the culture wars merely for standing up for women's rights.
He has just been a guest on Joe Rogan's podcast (3 hours and it is a bit meandering), and this is an interesting chat with Tanya DeGrunwald, talking about DEI, No Debate and the turning tide, led by the corporate world.
Tanya de Grunwald was great, I enjoyed that interview.
Fletchers have just announced a $470+ million loss for the year ..about twice as much as last year…(!)
And they are selling their construction arm..
I've said it before..but it's worth saying again…
I reckon the left parties should think laterally..
..and should announce they will buy that construction wing…and will use it to build state houses…
.. it's sitting there…all ready to go ..
..and I think it is a policy the punters will like ..
..concrete promises (pun deliberate)…to do some of the shit that needs doing ..IMHO..
..why not ..?
Why not? Well its a pretty disfunctional part of the business that they cant turn around. So really just be buying a big set of problems and no easy way to solve them.
Generous directorships, overpaid senior management, a need for a dividend to rentiers will do that.
Coupled with an government that has smashed a hole in the construction pipeline.
I like Phil's idea. MOW 2.0.
I think further investigation should be undertaken before jumping to that conclusion ..
A construction entity tasked with building social housing..is a different beast to a profit driven wing of a large corporation…
..to me..it is an off the shelf solution..that should be scoped (apologies for the corporate-speak..)
I would amend their brief to building social housing…and the infrastructure we so dearly need ..
How to pay for it..?..promise to claw back the handouts to the landlords/tobacco industry…and to ring-fence that claw back for just these purposes…
Once again.. something I think the punters will like…
Shout out to our comrades that have downed tools and have withdrawn their labour.
Secondary teachers on strike over the latest insult from this pro-actively anti worker government.
Same tactics, senior ministers lying about wages during negotiations, in breach of good faith bargaining kaupapa. And… getting away with it.
Wait for the typical tory attack lines- 9am-3pm, holidays etc etc.
This week, at work, an email went out about a child that is a high suicide risk not being on the grounds. Fortunately they were with family, but dealing with these complex issues is a far greater responsibility than what most of talk-hate radio's audience have to deal with.
+1000
They have such a crap Minister, Collins didn't help yesterday, and Roche is just insulting them.
Collins is yesterday?
Alternative Headline: Teachers appalled at 3 years of real wage cuts have rights threatened by Ministers
Alternative alternative Headline: Rights used by citizens as intended to oppose government, so fascist ministers suggest removing them.
Ick, ickitty, ick.
If anyone wonders why Philip Morris wanted control of the vaping market, and the why the Minister extended the 'trial' to an entire political term, it's now figured out that young vape users are three times as likely to go to smoking.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/aug/19/young-vape-users-three-times-as-likely-to-start-smoking-study
Just maybe MoH needs to reconsider its advice on vaping being a gateway blocker to actual smoking.
Wasn't smoking in decline before the attack on smokers?
citation please. If you don’t know, then go look it up and then bring back your political points.
It wasn't a statement of fact. It was a question.
https://teara.govt.nz/en/smoking/print#:~:text=The%20stronger%20actions%20of%20the%20late%201980s,or%20over%2C%20compared%20with%203%2C347%20in%201963.
You need better AI.
https://www.health.govt.nz/statistics-research/surveys/new-zealand-health-survey/publications/202324-survey-publications/trends-in-smoking-and-vaping
Your comment looked like a rhetorical question, not a genuine one, and your point was and still is missing.
https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/08/19/carnivals-over-peters-calls-mallards-early-exit-as-irish-ambassador/
https://teara.govt.nz/en/foreign-policy-and-diplomatic-representation/print
Spot how many there were.
10 here since Peters entered politics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_high_commissioners_of_New_Zealand_to_the_United_Kingdom
6 here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ambassadors_of_New_Zealand_to_the_United_States
Only 2 since 1978.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_permanent_representatives_of_New_Zealand_to_the_United_Nations_in_New_York
Peters replaced 3 of the 18 when Foreign Minister – Hunt in London (2005-2008) and Groser in DC (2017-2020) Goff in London and now Mallard (2023-).
He also replaced Kelly the High Commissioner to Canada (2005-2008) in 2006.
5th on the list (ex MP’s) since 1978.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_high_commissioners_of_New_Zealand_to_Canada
He appointed Annette King High Commissioner to Canberra in 2018.
The only one on the list – we take this seriously, or no other politician wanted it … .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_high_commissioners_of_New_Zealand_to_Australia
I think Peters is being a bit disingenuous here. There’s a long-standing, unwritten rule in New Zealand politics that former senior politicians, including former Speakers of the House, often get appointed to high commissioner or ambassadorial roles where political experience and connections matter more than technical ability.
It’s hardly unusual, and it’s not like any of these political appointments have ever caused us diplomatic embarrassment.
Even Phil Goff’s so-called “controversial” remarks weren’t quite what Peters made them out to be. Goff wasn’t making official statements on behalf of the government: he was speaking at Chatham House, drawing on his experience as a former Foreign Minister, and raising a legitimate historical parallel.
You might not agree with his framing, but to sack him over it was heavy-handed.
Even more ironic? Peters himself forced out Tim Groser from his post in Washington, even though he was one of our most senior and respected career diplomats before his foray into politics.
This feels less like a principled stand and more like classic Winston chasing utu, as only he can do.