Budget 2025 Robs Researchers To Pay For Regulation
This years budget allows us to update our analysis showing how far short of the 0.6% of GDP target we fall. We advocate for alternative budgets that initially restore core public research investment to inflation-adjusted 2019 levels and then proceed …
NZAS Co-Presidents Lucy Stewart and Troy Baisden have made initial comments on the Budget released by the coalition government this week, highlighting the 're-prioritisation' of frontline research funds to pay for the government's science reforms. Pre-Budget commentary has emphasised that Aotearoa New Zealand's research and science system has been under-funded by successive governments for decades and that meaningful new funding is needed if we want to achieve the same level of science and innovation as other small advanced economies [1]. The need for funding from government was also a key theme of the first Science System Advisory Group report released in January 2025 [2].
Prof Troy Baisden laments, 'Following last year's nothing-burger budget for science, this year edges toward a black hole budget for the research system. Many areas of research may now be heading across a threshold where there's no escape and they can no longer rebuild what is being lost.'
Dr Lucy Stewart comments, 'The Government signalled that there was unlikely to be new spending for research and science in this Budget. They have also, in the past six months, demonstrated a willingness to take funding away from areas of research that they do not see as priorities. This was most clearly illustrated by the changes to the Marsden Fund in December 2024, which removed social sciences and humanities from the eligible areas of research. In recent weeks they have also announced that the Endeavour Fund will not award new funding in 2026 and will only offer extensions to current projects which are considered to be 'value for money' and to align with the government's priorities.
At the same time, they have committed to significant reforms to the science system including the establishment of three – or perhaps four – new Public Research Organisations, two created by merging existing Crown Research Institutes, as well as the establishment of a new regulator for genetic technologies. These reforms will cost money. In this Budget, we learn that they propose to pay for them by cutting yet more money from our core research funds – primarily the Health Research Fund, which has $17 million less budgeted in the 2025/2026 financial year, as well as the Catalyst Research fund, which loses $12 million. The Strategic Science Investment Fund is also hit by significant 'reprioritisation' of funds forecast across the next three years, and cuts of approximately $5 million are proposed for the Marsden Fund in 2026/2027 and 2027/2028 as well. The Marsden Fund has effectively not received any new funding for nearly a decade, so it is already very hard-hit by inflation.
As I said last year, I expect to see more job losses across the sector before the end of the year. Many researchers depend entirely on contestable funding to support their jobs and less contestable funding available means fewer researchers will be employed.
I do note that there are small but relatively meaningful increases budgeted for funds supporting the development of mātauranga Māori researchers and organisations, PhD students working on applied science, and early and mid career researcher fellowships. This is good to see. However, at the same time the research system that these researchers are part of is being torn down around them. Small increases cannot make up for that.'
Prof Troy Baisden adds: 'Today's budget continues to double down on a pattern spanning four decades, in which New Zealand's governments have been world leaders in choosing not to invest in the future. We appear determined to fall behind peer nations with our investment in research, science, innovation and technology. This is increasingly true for universities, which continue to see the increasing support they saw across the decade to 2020 reversed.
There's almost no good news, with significant areas now having gone many years without any adjustment for the pulse of inflation. Areas we depend on such as GeoNet, which helps us understand earthquakes and tsunamis as they affect us, are seeing budget cuts of around 13%. The significant research programmes supported through the Ministry of Primary Industries are not immune, with reductions of $25 million across areas such as sustainable land management and greenhouse gas emissions reductions. We're seeing not just funding cuts in the future, but also 'efficiencies' where underspending has occurred relative to signalled allocations. Relatively small new initiatives in space science, touted as an important new area while Judith Collins was Minister, appear to be petering out to nothing.
The Table of Estimates produced with Budget 2025 also allows us to look back, from an estimate for the year just ended to finalised funding in previous years. Funding for the entire tertiary education sector has flatlined then declined, following the period when Government helped stabilise the sector during the pandemic's impacts. Up until 2019 the sector was growing consistently. Although the current budget is consistent with the pre-2019 trend in dollar terms, it doesn't account for the recent pulse of inflation. Institutional budgets are undergoing increasing stress and provide little solace to top research teams who miss out or are now deemed ineligible for contestable research funding such as the Marsden fund. A very disappointing case is the significant cuts to the Health Research Fund, slowing the front of a pipeline into an innovation ecosystem where New Zealand has global companies.
When last year's budget emerged with cuts to science, we noted that our hope for this year sat with Sir Peter Gluckman's Science System and University Advisory Groups (SSAG and UAG) to make a case for future funding. The first SSAG report made a very strong case, in part noting that we should focus more on the foundation that core public research investment provides. When carried out with sufficient quality, core public research investment of about 0.6% of GDP ensures that additional investments by government and business have strong payoffs. These payoffs across the economy have been tallied as an average of $11 for every dollar invested in Europe, or $5–20 for every dollar invested in Australia. The government is calling for that further investment, but we continue to undermine the foundation that's needed for these payoffs to be reliable.
This year's budget allows us to update our analysis showing how far short of the 0.6% of GDP target we fall. We advocate for alternative budgets that initially restore core public research investment to inflation-adjusted 2019 levels and then proceed to the 0.6% target over 5 years.'
2 https://www.mbie.govt.nz/assets/science-system-advisory-group-report.pdf
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
18-07-2025
- NZ Herald
Government ponders radical power reforms as prices rise
Back then, the person leading the prosecution was none other than Willis herself, and she was ruthless in her disallowance of Grant Robertson's excuses. Pressing Robertson on skyrocketing mortgage costs, Willis asked the following: 'Is it seriously his position that international factors are to blame for this growth in a core component of New Zealanders' cost of living?' The answer then, as it is now, is sadly yes. The international factors that were responsible for a third or more of the post-Covid inflation spike, according to Treasury research, are much the same as the factors weighing on Willis' growth prospects in 2025. These have caused Treasury to revise its forecasts for GDP growth in the coming year from an impressive and possibly election-winning 3.3% to a less impressive 2.9% at the most recent Budget. That follows revisions to its GDP estimates for the year to the end of June, which Treasury tweaked from a gloomy 0.5% growth to a decidedly grim 0.8% contraction. Voters may be slightly more forgiving of first-term Willis than they were of second-term Robertson – but only slightly. Like frustrated parents, voters tend to care less about who made the mess than they do about who will clean it up. National, a party elected on a mandate of getting New Zealand 'back on track', will begin the election year presiding over an economy that's on the same high inflation, slow growth track voters rejected in 2023. There's not a lot of space for the Government to move. Witness the performative outrage over butter prices, which Willis will raise in a meeting with Fonterra boss Miles Hurrell when she meets him next week. These high prices are the result of a good thing: high commodity prices that are buoying rural economies. The problem is that incomes are so low people cannot afford to pay them. The Government knows these prices are a good thing (Willis certainly does, having spent five years at Fonterra) and so does most of the Opposition. As recently as April, it celebrated them, with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon then telling the Taranaki Chamber of Commerce the economic recovery was being led by farming. 'What has been exciting to see is dairy prices are hitting an all-time high,' he said. Finance Minister Nicola Willis applauds the regional economic recovery but has to manage the high consumer prices that have followed it. Photo / Mark Mitchell Fonterra may be being naughty, potentially fattening the margins of its consumer products to make that side of the business attractive for sale, but the key driver of those prices is the high value of commodities at the moment – and that's a good thing for the country. You can slightly forgive the Government for not saying this. Celebrating high butter prices does have a Marie Antoinette-ish aspect to it. However, they perhaps did not need to point the finger so vigorously in the other direction. The problem with affordability is only half to do with prices. The other half is wages. While it seems an affront to our identity that people of a dairying nation like ours cannot afford butter, the more serious question is why New Zealand incomes struggle to keep up with those of international consumers who are willing to pay for our products. There's a reason why everyone turns their guns on Fonterra and the farmers for high prices, and that's because it's easier to blame producers than it is to solve the manifold crises that have held back New Zealanders' wages. Act Party leader and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour at a rally last weekend. Photo / Alex Burton This browbeating of corporate New Zealand is becoming a coalition issue. Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour had a go at critics of the supermarkets and banks in his rally speech last Sunday. 'It would be the easiest thing in the world for me to give a speech saying they're crooked and need to be punished somehow. They should be taxed somehow, have their businesses broken up, or be watched over by even toothier watchdogs. It's the curse of zero-sum thinking,' he said. The remarks were not just directed at Labour and the Opposition, but at the rest of the coalition, which, since coming into office, has engaged in enthusiastic supermarket bashing. In the backdrop to all of this is a looming cost-of-living decision that will likely be made in the next few months and could have a big influence on the election campaign. In February, Energy Minister Simon Watts and his Associate Minister Shane Jones selected offshore economics consultancy Frontier to be the lead reviewer of the electricity market (the review was announced in November 2024). The terms of reference are bold, saying the firm needed to look at foundational parts of the market such as generation investment incentives, efficiency, and effective wholesale and retail markets. The report came back some weeks ago and is sitting on the desks of ministers. Watts has told media a decision can be expected before the end of September. One idea is to revive Contact Energy's 2021 Thermal Co plans. Frontier has worked with Contact before, writing evidence on the firm's behalf for its proposed acquisition of Manawa. That idea would be for a company, 'Thermal Co', to own, operate and eventually retire the major power companies' thermal generation assets. The price of thermal energy sets the price for the rest of the electricity market. This new entity, potentially with a large Crown stake, would have a large influence over prices and over the incentive for firms to bring forward renewable generation, the only long-term fix to the predicament of high prices. The move would be incredibly interventionist, which is perhaps why NZ First seems so keen on it and why no one in the Act Party seems to know the report is back. National is caught in the middle. It knows something is wrong in the market but wonders whether radical reform is quite what's needed to fix it. After all, six years of radicalism from the oil and gas ban, to the 100% renewable electricity generation target, to Lake Onslow are at least partly responsible for the mess the market's in at the moment. Those decisions were unhelpful. Labour's own appointed working group told the Government in 2019 the 100% target would lead to 'large increases in retail electricity prices from today's levels' and would undermine decarbonisation efforts by putting up prices – advice that turned out to be prescient. Do we really want another few years of radicalism? National may seek to make a virtue out of mild, stable reforms that bring stability to the market and encourage private investment in more generation. The challenge here is that this new generation needs to be in firming and, in the short to medium term, there's a good chance this will involve fossil fuels (Jones floated the idea of a new coal station in the House this week). That's going to be unpopular. Other ideas floating around the coalition include changing ETS settings to reduce the Government-imposed cost of burning coal, a cost that is reflected in the wider electricity price. That might fix one broken market by undermining another. Something needs to happen and not just because high prices are weighing on households. The coalition, or at least the National and Act parts of it, appears ready to campaign on asset sales at the next election. That argument is going to sound a lot less persuasive if the gentailers, part-privatised in the last major asset selloff, are squeezing consumers. Treasury papers gush about the fact that the mixed-ownership companies, Air NZ, Genesis, Mercury, and Meridian, are basically the publicly-owned companies that are performing well. Consumers, feeling fleeced by all of them, probably disagree. And that's the trouble with this economic recovery. It might look okay from the Beehive – even good. The recovery is under way and it's a good one. For once, we are seeing an economic recovery driven by exports and not immigration and house prices, which continue to fall. As Chris Bishop said this week, New Zealand would be a better country were it to 'destroy' the idea that the economy is linked to growing house prices. He's right, the country would be better off if we did. Sadly, the record of the electorate is that house prices, where two-thirds of New Zealand households have stashed the vast bulk of their wealth, seem to be the main indicator they care about. The Key Government, often remembered as a time of relative economic prosperity, presided over years of high unemployment. The unemployment rate didn't fall below 5% until the quarter before that Government was voted out of office. Inflation, however, was almost always below 2% and house prices were rising. House prices made people feel richer. It wasn't good, but it worked – and it wasn't just Key, the Ardern Government turned a blind eye to unsustainable house prices too. Unfortunately for National, this is probably the 'track' many households are keen to get back on – and not the one currently being taken by the coalition. You can hardly blame them for feeling the surest sign of economic recovery is in their own balance sheets. The Government's challenge is to persuade people that its own 'track' is the better one.
RNZ News
17-07-2025
- RNZ News
Council $3.1m rates blunder: New Plymouth households could be overcharged by $102
The New Plymouth District Council building. File photo. Photo: RNZ / Robin Martin An urgent review of New Plymouth District Council's (NPDC) annual plan has revealed that it has hiked residential rates by 12.8 percent, rather than the 9.9 percent indicated. The blunder equates to $102 per ratepayer or $3.1 million. The error was discovered as part of a review ordered when the NPDC approved its annual plan in May, exclusive of GST, meaning it could've forgone $20m in revenue. New Plymouth Mayor Neil Holdom took personal responsibility for the mistakes and recommended that councillors approve a one-off rebate for ratepayers at an extraordinary meeting next week. That would require the NPDC to find $3.1 million in savings elsewhere. It was not the only mistake in the latest review. The review and subsequent report produced by Simpson Grierson also identified a resolution wording error relating to industrial water use. The rates resolution wording would need to be amended to ensure properties on a restricted water flow were able to be charged $418 for each cubic metre of water as intended. This gaffe could've cost the council $1.4m in lost revenue. Holdom said he was extremely disappointed by the errors and the impact they could have had on the community. "As mayor, I take responsibility for the integrity of the information we use to make decisions. Councillors acted in good faith based on the data presented to us. "We now know that information was flawed, and the safeguards we had to verify the validity of that information and the assumptions behind it have failed. "I want to offer my sincere apology to our community. You deserve better. The buck stops with me, and I am committed to ensuring we learn from this, fix the underlying issues, to rebuild public confidence and find a way to put this right." Holdom said the reporting errors did not affect the validity of the rates, but the council was taking action to mitigate their impact. At an extraordinary meeting on 22 July, the NPDC council would decide between the following options: Holdom said improvements to NPDC's internal processes and checks would be implemented immediately following the findings of the independent review. Chief executive Gareth Green proposed structural changes to strengthen financial capability and oversight within the organisation. "On behalf of the NPDC organisation, I wish to offer my sincere apologies to the mayor and councillors, and our entire community, for the failure of our systems and processes that led to these errors." "As the leader of the staff organisation of NPDC, it is my responsibility to ensure that we have adequate safeguards to ensure that every piece of advice we provide our elected members is accurate and robust. "That clearly has not been the case in this instance, and this failing shows that change is required." Green said he was committed to implementing changes swiftly and building back the trust and confidence of the community. Holdom said councillors would also be asked to update council policy to implement an independent review of all future financial plans. "This situation highlights the risks of insufficient specialist financial experience, particularly in local government." Holdom said that while Audit NZ signed off on the long-term planning process that included the incorrect rating assumption, "the community rightly expects that process to provide assurance [that] the underlying models and data are robust". "That assurance did not eventuate in this case. We owe it to our community to be honest, to take ownership, and to do better. That's exactly what we are doing." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Newsroom
16-07-2025
- Newsroom
Govt winds up council reform storm
Analysis: It's a sentiment likely to set pulses racing among the current crop of Government ministers. In 2010, four-term councillor Bryan Cadogan aimed to unseat sitting Clutha mayor Juno Hayes by running on a platform of tying rates to inflation and focusing on core services. Cadogan won by 354 votes, turning around the previous election result in the district hemmed in by Dunedin, Central Otago, and Southland. Now, the Clutha mayor, who isn't running for re-election in October's elections, finds himself, and his sector, in the firing line of an interventionist Government considering rates caps, and introducing legislation to ensure councils focus on – that's right – core services. The Local Government NZ conference in Ōtautahi/Christchurch was formally launched on Wednesday with a video address, of less than two minutes, by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon. Councils need to get back to basics, he said, spending wisely and delivering value. What does that mean? 'Prioritising pipes over vanity projects,' explained the prime minister, flanked by national flags. 'It means roads over reports, and it means real outcomes.' When the address finished, conference MC Miriama Kamo started clapping loudly, joined somewhat unenthusiastically by a smattering of conference attendees. 'I'm the only one clapping, I see,' Kamo quipped. Cadogan says the Government's message landed 'pretty flatly' with him. 'It's getting a wee bit tedious getting asked time and time again to do the impossible.' Chris Bishop, the minister overseeing resource management reforms, took a more fire and brimstone approach than his leader, saying there was shrinking evidence councils were cutting their cloth and enabling growth. 'You cry out for more financing and funding tools. We're giving them to you. You ask for a better, simpler planning system. We're giving this to you, too. 'We are getting our house in order. It's time you sorted yours out.' (Some would have thought that line a bit rich, given analysis of May's Budget suggests Luxon's coalition will increase gross debt by more in five years than the Covid-affected previous government did in six.) Bishop announced a 'plan stop', warning councils not to waste money and time reviewing city and district plans, and regional policy statements – with narrow exceptions – ahead of an overhaul of resource management laws due to land in 2027. 'The time for excuses is over,' Chris Bishop told the Local Government NZ conference in Christchurch. Photo: David Williams Sam Broughton, mayor of Selwyn, just south of Christchurch, and president of Local Government NZ, says: 'It was really good to have that certainty.' Is that just common sense? Broughton says the progress on reforms is pleasing, but adds: 'It feels like councils have been in this reform storm for six or seven years, and has just been ongoing change without actually landing something.' Local Government Minister Simon Watts introduced the bill to focus councils on core services, which is expected to have its first reading on Thursday. ('It feels like the Government has a caricature of local government that isn't true,' Broughton says. He notes 80 percent of Selwyn council's capital spending is on pipes and roads.) Watts' explanation of why it was necessary to force councils to concentrate on core services, like roads, water and rubbish, sent offended ripples through the conference crowd. The minister used the analogy of setting boundaries for his children. Letting them do whatever they liked might lead to bad choices, he suggested. Instead, he might tell them, 'Hey, you've got these five things to do'. Among the crowd's murmurs, one conference-goer shouted: 'Just a bit patronising, mate!' From the conference stage, Watts appeared to pour cold water on the idea regional councils were about to be scrapped. 'We're thinking about it,' Watts said, adding ministers were cognisant 'there's already a huge amount of reform underway in your sector'. Bishop tried to mollify concerns about potential environmental consequences from the audience, saying a new Natural Environment Act would focus on biodiversity, ecology and human health. Later, the minister tells Newsroom: 'There will be environmental limits that will be set through the new regime.' (After a remit passed at Local Government NZ's annual general meeting on Wednesday, councils called for a review of local government's structure.) Christopher Luxon beamed in to the Local Government NZ conference in Christchurch. Photo: David Williams Government reforms for local government include the network-merging replacement for three waters, Local Water Done Well, waving city and regional deals under the noses of councils, and offering different funding and financing options for infrastructure to speed up house-building. Back to Cadogan, the Clutha mayor, who talks to Newsroom while walking to a negotiation with other councils on water services. He says despite Government rhetoric, councils can't be expected to achieve the triumvirate of lower rates, infrastructure upgrades and under-control debt. 'The Government know it, we know it, but we just keep on getting this.' Clutha council's experience puts those financial management challenges in stark relief. In 2019, its external borrowings were $5 million. Five years later, it had ballooned to $123m. To add salt to the financial wound, this year's average rates rise was an 'ungodly' 16.59 percent. How did this happen? 'Three waters, wholly and solely,' Cadogan says. (Last year, the mayor predicts the financial consequences of the 'three waters debacle' will hit. In the latest annual plan, he says 89.4 percent of this year's rates rise is attributable to roads, rubbish and three waters.) Clutha's unfortunate figures are: the third-longest water reticulation network in the country, with 27 sewage or water plants on 30-year consents, and, crucially, only 18,500 people to pay for it. Of the country's 565 drinking water quality breaches last year, 338 or 60 percent were in Clutha. 'We all want lower rates increases,' says Sam Broughton, the Selwyn district mayor and Local Government NZ president. Photo: David Williams Cadogan gives the example of a water upgrade for the tiny town of Waihola: running an 18.5km pipeline from Milton's water treatment plant oto the reservoir cost $6.3m. After years of problems with water quality and quantity, boil water notices were removed for all but 20 of the town's 247 houses. 'Then we go to Heriot, and then we go to Tapanui, then Owaka, then Clinton,' Cadogan says. 'It's a financial delusion that you can have rates cap, you can have debt ceilings, and you have to do this infrastructure update.' It would have been better for the National-led coalition to lift the hood on Labour's three waters policy and chuck out what they didn't like, Broughton says, instead of scrapping it and starting again. He thinks resolving water across the country might take seven or eight more steps. Policy lurches and delays cost millions of dollars and can, of course, increase council rates. Many councils might feel aggrieved by the ministerial attack given the National Party's pre-election commitment to devolution and localism. Luxon promised to reshape the relationship between central and local government. 'It does feel like every party in opposition is a localist,' Broughton says, 'and then as soon as they're in power, they become a creature that draws all the more power to themselves.' Broughton was applauded by conference attendees for his opening comments – made before Bishop's address. 'We all want lower rates increases. I want lower rates increases, I know you want lower rates increases, I hear from my community they want lower rates increases. But it can't be at the expense of our children picking up the tab because of our negligence today.' The Selwyn mayor tells Newsroom a key problem is councils have few alternatives to raise money. The best tool the Government could give councils, in his opinion, is to return GST spending on new houses locally. 'That would be a game-changer for us,' he says, noting between 1000 and 3000 houses have been built each year in Selwyn over the past five or six years. Broughton's also a fan of bed taxes, something Queenstown's council has, for years, been pushing for. Luxon said this week the Government's not actively considering a bed tax. 'It has just been an avalanche of unstoppable figures. Unstoppable.' Bryan Cadogan, Clutha mayor This is the second year ministers have used the Local Government NZ conference to berate councils for spending on 'nice-to-haves'. Last year, the venue, Wellington's $180m Tākina centre, was in the crosshairs. But Christchurch's half-billion-dollar monolithic convention centre, Te Pae, is of a different ilk – paid for by taxpayers as a post-quake anchor project. Luxon, Watts and Bishop did miss a trick in Christchurch, though. A 15-minute walk away from Te Pae is the new stadium, Te Kaha – a loss-making facility that will cost ratepayers $453m to build. The city's ratepayers face a three-year, cumulative rates rise of 24.66 percent that without the stadium, that would have been 19.43 percent. Using Luxon's words, the stadium isn't roads, rubbish or water, and tends, perhaps, more towards a vanity project. The last word goes to Cadogan, the outgoing Clutha mayor. He hopes a water services 'umbrella' with other councils will help his district save on infrastructure spending. 'We've been basically a stand-alone council for the last five years. Have a look what that did to our debt,' he says. 'I'm gutted as a mayor. I pride myself on really understanding figures. I understand them all right. It has just been an avalanche of unstoppable figures. Unstoppable.'
